Scholarly but Relevant:
A Comparison of Topic Frequency Between
Journalism Quarterly, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media
and RTNDA Communicator
by
David Ozmun
Assistant Professor of Mass Communications
Ouachita Baptist University
Box 3680
Arkadelphia, Arkansas 71998-0001
501 245 5574
e-mail address: [log in to unmask]
This paper was submitted to the
Broadcast Education Association
News Division
1997
Introduction
The founding editor of Critical Studies in Mass
Communication wrote of the day he presented a grant proposal to
an executive at ABC to help launch the journal. When the editor,
Robert Avery, explained to the executive, Alan Wurtzel, that the
journal would include articles highly critical of all the
television networks, Wurtzel smiled and said, "You don't really
expect anything written in your journal to make any difference
here. Don't worry about it" (Avery and Eadie, 1993, p. 175).
While there is little research into reading practices of
broadcast news directors, some studies suggest that academic
journals are rarely perused. How germane is the work of
communications scholars to mass media professionals? This study
explores the journalistic relevancy potential of research topics
investigated by academic journals to television news directors.
This paper begins with a short history of the philosophical
battle for the journalism and communication programs in higher
education and a literature review of the research of authorship
and readership within the scholarly journal community. This is
followed by an examination of topics addressed in specific
publications. A content analysis of articles delimited to
broadcast news topics from Journalism Quarterly and Journal of
Broadcasting and Electronic Media are compared with articles from
Communicator, the publication of the Radio and Television News
Directors Association. Statistical tests explore correlation
between the topics addressed by two journals dedicated to
research and one written for broadcast news professionals.
Background
In his history of communication study and research, Rogers
(1994) marks the appointment of Ralph O. Nafziger to The
University of Wisconsin's school of journalism in 1949 as a
seminal point in the decades-long battle over the purpose and
direction of journalism and mass communications education. The
conflict arose between the "Green-Eyeshades," those educators who
advocate for universities the primary responsibility of equipping
the practitioner, and the "Chi-Squares," who, according to
Rogers, "sought to provide the emerging field of communication
study with an objective understanding of human information
exchange, based on scientific research" (p. 460).
The debate grew heated through the years, with caustic
articles in trade journals like The Quill offering soapboxes to
proponents of both views. In the 1960s it appeared the Green-
Eyeshades were fearful that the "communicologists, the
methodologists, the sociologists, the academics" might become too
influential in what was the then the Association for Education in
Journalism (Highton, 1987).
By the 1980s the battle seemed to be over, as far as some
were concerned, and the Chi-Squares had won. Lovell (1987) used
Journalism Quarterly to elaborate on three reasons why
professionals would find nothing of interest in its issues.
First, he claimed articles were murky in both style and content,
focusing on minor points and expanding on them. In addition,
instead of covering a topic of current interest to the
profession, JQ "devotes an excess amount of space to topics of
questionable relevance" (p. 23). Finally, Lovell charged that
potentially interesting subjects were rendered unintelligible
through unnecessary complication.
The editor of JQ, Guido Stemple, responded to each of the
complaints in a subsequent issue of The Quill (1988), and urged
those in journalism to work with those in academe to bring the
two sides closer and support each other. Journalism and mass
communication are not the only academic disciplines to hear harsh
criticism of research and scholarly publication. Sykes (1988),
whose book title Profscam embodied his view of most educators in
higher education, quoted a respondent to a survey by the American
Council of Learned Societies to make his point: "There are far
too many journals, and most of what they publish is ignorant
drivel" (p. 118). There is also the issue of applicability of
research to policy making. Noam (1993) perceived that
communications scholarship has no real world role. Even though
communications studies have made significant contributions, Noam
declared "when a discipline that is by now fairly substantial in
terms of numbers and maturity is largely absent in the shaping of
society's treatment of the very subject of its study, one must
take note" (pp. 199-200). This raises two questions: Does the
literature suggest that attempts at bridging theory and research
with the news business are doomed; and are there means to a
successful link, at least as it relates to the subjects under
consideration here, broadcast news and news directors?
Literature Review
Dary (1973) surveyed the membership of the radio-television
division of the Association for Education in Journalism in the
early 1970s. Of those responding to the questionnaire, almost all
teachers in higher education had approximately seven years of
news work experience, and the typical respondent considered
teaching as the primary role and research and service to the
profession to be secondary. Although in need of updating, this
survey was conducted well into the Green-Eyeshades vs. Chi-Square
debate. Schweitzer (1985a) has looked extensively into the
research productivity of journalism and mass communication
scholars. From his survey comparing academic journalism
researchers to newspaper editors and other news practitioners,
the author was surprised to find that the academics agreed with
the practitioners that more practical, problem-oriented research
studies were needed. Ranked second was a call for better, more
clear writing.
That same year Schweitzer (1985b) wrote that journalism
schools too often followed the industry, when they should be
leading it. He emphasized
Without in any sense denigrating the mission of
educating undergraduate students, I contend that
the secondary mission of providing service for
professionals is what will ultimately determine
the success of schools and departments of
journalism (p. 38).
But in a subsequent study, Pease (1993) conceded that
professional development by journalism educators still worked
against them when promotion and tenure were concerned; it didn't
count as much as juried conference papers and journal articles.
Pease also found deep resentment among those for whom
professional service was an important part of the mission.
Inquiries into research productivity in broadcasting and
telecommunications in university programs rely on the conclusion
(backed up by evidence) that scholarly productivity is an
important measure of the school's quality. Publication in
selected journals suggests greater weight by department heads
when considering promotion, allocating funds and promoting the
school to prospective graduate students (Vincent, 1984, and
Vincent, 1991). Administrators of graduate programs, Schweitzer
(1989) learned, did not agree that journalism faculty should be
able to receive tenure and promotion without having to do
scholarly research.
As the long-standing debate indicates, journalism and
communication educators have a difficult time satisfying all
sides. In a review of the research on journalism schools, Fedler
(1993) countered criticism from professionals in the newspaper
industry. He found evidence that three perspectives were
mistaken: that students were being taught by Ph.D.'s who knew
little about the practical work of publishing a newspaper, that
students were not taking a sufficient number of courses in the
liberal arts, and that editors did not care whether their new
employees had degrees in journalism or not.
Riffe, Hedgepeth and Ziesenis (1992) surveyed print
journalists, press association heads and educators with the
question "What do you think is the most important issue facing
the field of journalism today?" and then content analyzed four
trade publications, categorizing articles according to the survey
findings. They were struck that the topic that concerned
journalists the most, the "quality of journalism," was also the
dominant topic addressed in Journalism Quarterly.
When Lovell (1987) listed his complaints against the chi-
squares he was concerned about the lack of articles covering
issues of interest to the profession. Yet when he listed the
subjects covered in JQ from 1974-1983, the dominant category was
Press and Society, not theory or research methodology.
On the other hand, an argument could be made that authors
and educators could do more in addressing the concerns of
journalists and news managers. Weaver and Wilhoit (1988) surveyed
journalism and mass communication faculty and found that while
42.5 percent read Journalism Quarterly, only 3.1 percent read
RTNDA Communicator, the publication of the Radio and Television
News Directors Association. Almost a third of the respondents
either read only academic journals or read neither industry nor
research publications.
Part of the dilemma for educators engaging in research
concerns the review process. Endres and Wearden (1990) found that
reviewers for journalism and mass communication journals are a
distinct, homogenous and separate group from others in higher
education. Reviewers were more likely to have received the
terminal degree from a university that emphasized publication,
possess only about five years of professional experience, hold
senior rank, and been reviewing between four to six articles a
year for the past nine years.
Soley (1993) examined whether communication research was
reaching an audience beyond readers of academic journals. Tracing
the published works of the 53 most frequently published
researchers (from an earlier study), he determined that these
researchers were not writing articles that were distributed to
the general public, nor were they writing articles for
professionals. The audience was almost exclusively academicians.
Soley advocated a determined attempt to reach out to
consumer and trade publications, assuming the research was
important. Another study by Schweitzer (1989) insinuated that
this was plausible. Surveying productive scholars for the reasons
why they do research, he found that 97 percent felt that the
single most important determinant was personal motivation. They
wanted to do what they were doing, promotion and tenure concerns
notwithstanding. But if researchers look to professional concerns
and conduct applied research, would they have an audience?
Since 1972, Stone has regularly conducted national surveys
of broadcast news directors. In 1986, he noted that as news
directors' responsibilities grew from the 1970s into the 1980s
(particularly in television), their administrative and managerial
duties increased from 22 percent in 1972 to 53 percent in 1985. A
similar decline was indicated, from 39 percent to 12 percent,
from those indicating less time was spent on news. Redmond's
(1994) survey found that 83 percent of responding news directors
would like to have more formal management training if they could
afford the time. And Ellis (1992), when interviewing news
directors, reported that they were more manager than journalist.
One told her, "I would say probably more manager/leader...
probably 60/40 and that's only because of market size. If I was
in a bigger market it would probably be 90 percent."
There have been several studies surveying newspaper editors,
news practitioners and reporters that have included a question
about their reading habits. Stone (1987) surveyed broadcast news
directors who are members of the RTNDA about their reading
habits. Although this does not constitute a sampling of the
entire population, Stone found that 53 percent of the television
news directors and 70 percent of the radio news directors
responding to the survey read the Communicator at least an hour
or two each month. For news of the industry, over 70 percent
indicated they read Broadcasting and Cable, and for articles
concerning the field of journalism and mass communication,
Columbia Journalism Review and American Journalism Review were
the most cited. Stone has noted that since no more than 66
percent of all television newsrooms and only about ten percent of
radio newsrooms are represented in RTNDA, the findings may not be
generalizable (personal communication, June 19, 1995).
Weaver and Wilhoit's (1991) survey of American journalists
asked respondents to identify the types of functions they
performed; 48 percent of the 240 broadcast respondents indicated
they had managerial or supervisory duties. When asked to identify
reading frequency from a list of publications, RTNDA Communicator
was not listed. The authors did note that broadcasters were just
as likely to read Quill and Columbia Journalism Review as print
journalists. Journal of Broadcasting (now Journal of Broadcasting
and Electronic Media) was read regularly (almost every issue) by
only six percent; 11 percent answered "sometimes."
Much of the research explains who reads what, and why. What
has not been sufficiently examined is the nature of topics
included in journals and other publications. One exception is the
study by Riffe, Hedgepeth and Ziesenis (1992).
Method
A content analysis was conducted of Journalism Quarterly and
Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media from the years 1992-
1995, involving all articles that dealt in a direct way with
television news. The results were compared with a sample of
Communicator articles from 1992-1994. The topics determined from
the survey by Riffe et al., in which respondents were asked,
"What do you think is the most important issues facing the field
of journalism today?" were used to categorize issues in this
study. The topics that were compared and adapted from that study
are listed in Table 1. Each article that was included in the
table of contents was coded, except for book reviews,
commentaries and articles or columns less than one page in
length. The articles were coded by two researchers and checked
for intercoder reliability. Agreement was found in 96 percent of
the cases. In addition, intracoder reliability for the
Communicator was checked by one of the researchers after a three
month interval, achieving 82 percent agreement.
Reliability may be problematic, because a large number of
Communicator articles could not be coded exclusively to one
category. In addition, whereas a significant percentage of the
journal articles was determined to have a theoretical base, there
was always a secondary category that could be added. Where there
was disagreement between the researchers, a primary topic was
considered and accepted, or the article was rejected. This
process eliminated five articles from the study. Because of the
lack of mutual exclusivity among the categories taken from the
Riffe, et al. study, other researchers may make different
choices. Finally, the topic "credibility" was difficult to
specify because the original coding scheme was somewhat vague in
clarifying the category. Consequently, for this study it was
collapsed into the "ethics and professional values" category. The
final sample included 85 articles from Communicator and 53 from
JQ and JOBEM.
Table 1
Topics in CJR, E&P, Quill, JQ
Topics in Comm, JQ, JOBEM
Survival of newspapers, loss of and/or non-readership,circulation
Survival of station/news, loss of audience,ratings and audience
issues
benefits, pay, job security, compensation, health benefits,
workman's compensation, unionization
benefits, pay, job security, compensation, health benefits,
workman's compensation, unionization
credibility of paper
ethics, professional values, credibility
ethics, professional values
taxes-government intervention
taxes-states wanting to tax circulation and/or advertisements
national economy-recession, depression, etc.
national economy-recession, depression, etc.
competition for revenue and with new technologies and delivery
systems, advertising, etc.
competition for revenue, ad lineage, competition with new
technology and new delivery systems, etc.
journalistic quality-depth, objectivity, accuracy, completeness,
adequacy of coverage
journalistic quality-depth, objectivity, accuracy, completeness,
comprehensiveness, adequacy of coverage, appearance
working environment-conditions, workplace harmony, morale, impact
of technology upon work environment, personnel shortages
working environment-condition, workplace harmony, morale, impact
of technology upon, personnel shortages
education and training of journalists, continuing education,
background and beliefs
education and training, continuing education, background and
beliefs
changes in ownership and other issues concerning ownership
changes in ownership-chains, corporate, JOA, MBAs in newsroom
issues of access, legal constraints, libel,
1st amendment, privacy, etc.
issues of access, legal constraints, libel, FOI,
first amendment, privacy
recycling, environmental concerns, impact of newspaper on
environment
cultural diversity, minority issues, gender issues
cultural diversity, minority issues, gender issues (coverage and
staffing)
research methods, theory
media effects, diffusion, uses and
gratifications, research methods
history and biography
history and biography
international issues, reporters in foreign country, comparative
studies
international issues, U.S. reporters in foreign countries
non-journalism issues, ads, PR, entertainment, etc. issues
non-journalistic, other issues, including ads, PR, entertainment
Findings
Table 2 shows the results of the content analysis. As with
the original study of the journalism publications Columbia
Journalism Review, Quill and Editor and Publisher, the quality of
journalism (along with work environment issues) was the most
prevalent topic in Communicator. It was the second most dominant
category found in the broadcast news articles of JQ and JOBEM.
(Because of their similarity in nature and purpose, the two were
merged into one variable: scholarly publications.) When the
theory and research methods was omitted as a category,
"quality" became the dominant topic, far outnumbering the second
most cited category, "ethics and professional values." Ethics-
related articles also appeared frequently in the Communicator
sample. Among the primary topics, only "work environment" was
Table 2
Comparison of Topics
Topics Comm JQ/JOBEM JQ*
% % %
Quality of Journalism 20 25 21.5
Theory and Research 0 36.5 17.3
Ethics, credibility, values 17.6 11.5 6
Work environment issues 20 1.9 2.3
Competition 15.3 5.8 2.1
"Survival" 5.9 3.8 1.6
Diversity issues 4.7 5.8 4.4
Education and training 3.5 1.9 4.4
History/Biography 3.5 3.8 9.9
International 3.5 1.9 8.3
Non-journalism issues 2.4 0 11.5
Access issues, law 2.4 0
Benefits, pay 1.2 0 0
Ownership 0 1.9 1.9
National economy 0 0 0
Recycling and environment 0 0 0
Taxes and government 0 0 .2
Total 100 100
N of Cases 85 53
*The percentages were taken from the Riffe et al. study, which
analyzed all JQ articles from 1986-1990.
found at the top of one and the bottom of the other. The only
other category of topics above ten percent in either publication
was "competition for revenue, with new technologies and new
delivery systems." Categories listed below this were too
infrequent and clustered so as to limit definitive statements.
The quality of journalism, its depth, accuracy and adequacy
of coverage, and issues of ethics, professional values and
credibility represented 38 percent of the articles found in
Communicator and 37 percent of JQ/JOBEM articles. Competition and
the work environment were important but not consistent between
the publications.
The topics were ranked based on frequency for both
Communicator and JQ/JOBEM, and Spearman's rho, a measure of
association between rankings, was computed. The result was
similar to most of the pairwise rank correlations found by Riffe
et al. (.52, p=.04). Since there was no topic of "theory" or
"research" mentioned in the original survey, and since there is
evidence that most journal articles could be found to have an
emphasis beyond theory and methodology, a second ranking was
conducted without "theory/research" as a topic. The result of
Spearman's rho measure of correlation yielded greater strength of
association (.71, p=.003).
Discussion and Conclusions
Although rankings only provide for measurement of ordinal
data, and may screen certain elements of the data, the fact that
the two types of publications emphasize comparable issues
relevant to both professionals and researchers, such as the
quality of journalism and professional values and ethics,
suggests that gulf separating chi-squares and green-eyeshades may
not be quite so wide, and more the result of such factors as
writing style.
The focus of this study, broadcast news, limited the number
of articles for consideration over the four year period, and
resulted in a relatively small sample. In addition, budgetary
constraints prevented an initial survey of broadcast news
directors. Because of their accountability and service to both
management and news, news directors almost certainly would have
listed additional topics and deleted some from the index used in
this study. Future research could also add other publications
favored by broadcasters, such as Broadcasting and Cable and
Television/Radio Age. Additional news personnel might elicit
other discrete categories to questions concerning both issues and
publications.
This study was an effort to replicate, at least partially,
the Riffe et al. study, tailoring it to publications that discuss
issues applicable to broadcast journalists and accounting for
allusions to professional disdain for academic and scholarly
publications. This limited the content analysis to only those
articles mentioning broadcast news in their title or abstract.
The primary conclusion drawn from this preliminary
comparison is that while scholarly journals will continue with
theory and research as their main thrusts, the authors of
published research may also find a receptive audience among
professional publication editors. Studies revolving around the
quality of journalism, ethical and professional values, the work
environment, and competition with other media, new technology and
new delivery systems are topics relevant to readers of both types
of publications. Many, though, would require a re-working of the
text. Professional journalists, from reporters to news directors,
have shown a disdain for academic and theory-driven jargon and
may not be expected to adequately analyze and interpret
complicated statistical findings.
There is no shortage of criticism and advice from within the
academic ranks concerning the lack of academic journal readership
among news professionals. Syracuse University's Newhouse School
of Public Communication gathered at a 1985 conference the
perspectives of several researchers to help improve future
directions in communication scholarship. The comments of many of
the speakers echoed those described in this paper (Sharp, 1988).
Some urged less reductionism, quantification and jargon (see, for
example, John Stevens or Gerald Stone, in Sharp, 1988). Others
advocated clear separation of the theoretical from the applied
(see, for example, Melvin DeFleur or Brian Winston, in Sharp,
1988).
The professional journalist may not be expected to spend
time translating and adapting the findings of a study published
in a journal dedicated to the pursuit of new knowledge. The
journalist wants answers to existing, practical problems. Yet the
rewards for a scholarly researcher lie not in the practical but
in the theoretical -- the advancement of knowledge. Since there
is little evidence of movement from institutions to bridge these
goals, it falls to the researcher to take the initiative. It is
incumbent upon the institution, though, to recognize the effort.
The research topics discussed in this study are not only worth
the consideration of practitioners, but are worth the effort of
editing and re-writing for multiple audiences. Ultimately, such
effort can contribute to bridging the gap.
List of References
Avery, Robert K. and William F. Eadie. "Making a Difference in
the Real World." Journal of Communication 43(3) 1993: 174-
179.
Dary, David A. "A Survey of Broadcast Journalism Education."
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for
Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, 1973.
Dennis, Everette E. and Melvin DeFleur. "Communication Education
and Its Critics." Syracuse Scholar 10(1) 1990: 45-52.
Ellis, Sandra. "Television News Directors: An Examination of the
Relationship Among Leadership Style, Effectiveness and
Specified Variables." Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Tennessee-Knoxville, 1992.
Endres, Fred F. and Stanley T. Wearden. "Demographic Portrait of
Journal Reviewers." Journalism Educator 45(2) 1990: 45-52.
Fedler, Fred. "Growing Body of Evidence Refutes some Criticisms
of J-schools." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, 1993.
Highton, Jake. "Green Eyeshades vs. Chi-Squares." Quill, February
1986, 10-13.
Lovell, Ron. "Triumph of the Chi-Squares." Quill, October 1987,
22-25.
Noam, Eli. "Reconnecting Communications Studies with
Communications Policy." Journal of Communication 43(3) 1993:
38-45.
Pease, Edward C. "Professional Orientation Equals Second-Class
Status in Academe." Journalism Educator 48(3) 1993: 38-45.
Redmond, James W. "A Case for Graduate Programs for Television
News Directors." Journalism Educator 49(2) 1994: 33-42.
Riffe, Daniel, Julie K. Hedgepeth and Elizabeth B. Ziesenis. "The
Influence of Journals on Curriculum and Instruction."
Journalism Educator 47(3) 1992: 54-60.
Rogers, Everett M. A History of Communication Study New York: The
Free Press, 1994.
Schweitzer, John C. "How Academics and Practitioners Rate
Academic Research." Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, 1985a.
________. "Practical Research can Bring Respect to J-Schools."
Journalism Educator 40(2) 1985b: 38-41.
________. "Factors Affecting Scholarly Research Among Mass
Communication Faculty." Journalism Quarterly 66(2) 1989: 410-
417.
________. "The Research Climate in Programs in Journalism and
Mass Communication." Journalism Quarterly 66(4) 1989: 987-991.
Sharp, Nancy Weatherly, ed. Communications Research: The
Challenge of the Information Age New York: Syracuse University
Press, 1988.
Soley, Lawrence C. "With Whom are Mass Communication Researchers
Communicating?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, 1993.
Stemple, Guido H. III. "The Chi-Squares Strike Back." Quill,
January 1988, 30-31.
Stone, Vernon. "The Changing Profile of Broadcast News
Directors." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, 1986.
________. "How RTNDA News Directors use the Communicator."
Communicator August 1987, 44-45.
Sykes, Charles J. Profscam: Professors and the Demise of Higher
Education New York: St. Martin's Press, 1988.
Vincent, Richard C. "Broadcast Research Productivity of U.S.
Communications Programs, 1976-83." Journalism Quarterly 61(4)
1984: 841-846.
________. "Telecommunications Research Productivity of U.S.
Communication Programs: 1984-1989." Journalism Quarterly 68(4)
1991: 840-851.
Weaver, David H. and G. Cleveland Wilhoit. "A Profile of JMC
Educators: Traits, Attitudes and Values." Journalism Educator
43(2) 1988: 4-41.
________. The American Journalist Second Ed. Bloomington, IN:
Indiana University Press, 1991.
|
