Fortress journalism vs. Networked journalism

When we talk about Networked Journalism – what do we actually mean by that?

Lets start out with the opposite of Networked Journalism: Fortress Journalism. This is not merely a theoretical concept for analytical use but rather a practice of journalism that has been used by the major players on the news market until recently and is still being used today. Fortress Journalism as Horrocks calls it refers to a journalism that thinks of itself as a closed system. The first boundary consist of distancing and differentiate yourself from other news organizations: You want to be the only one who has got exclusive access to a news story. Or at least reporters want to be the first one to report from an event. The different fortresses – news organizations that is – are in a constant “battle” for being the only one or being the first one. Other news organizations are not your partner but rather your opponent that has to be fought against.
The second boundary consists in the making of the story. “Fortress journalists” like to think of themselves as “public servants”. But they become – at least in their view – public servants by being different and in a way superior to the public. They tell as Stanley Cohen has put it not how to think about a subject but at least they tell their audience what to think about. The image of the journalist of being an impartial, objective and professional commentator of current affairs is one of the hegemonic discourses of journalism and therefore important in the construction of the journalists view on themselves. They are the gatekeeper – we walk along their paths. They are the experts – we are the ones that listen to them.
It may sound like an exaggeration but this kind of fortress journalism has been the hegemonic way of news making for a few decades now. And it was not the worst way of making news. Institutions like the BBC, PBS, Deutsche Welle etc. have a good reputation precisely BECAUSE of this authoritarian way of creating news.

But - as Charlie Beckett has pointed out in "Supermedia" = this way of news making is increasingly coming under assault now. I want to point out just a few reasons for that:

1. The barriers for entering the news circuit have become less high. Everybody who has just a few basic computer skills can set up a blog, a twitter account or can discuss news stories in discussion boards. You don’t need an printing machine to get your word out.

2. The one to many accout that was a one way street has become a two-way street. Media nowadays works a a interactive media in which the opportunity to interact is essential.

3. Where journalism once was dominated by deadlines it has now been replaced by a 24/7 news cycle. This means that the focus of journalism has now been become the process of events rather than the product.

4. Users don’t use one single platform anymore. They switch between different channels. In order to get their news they may turn to the TV. In order to get their daily share of sports news they may turn to the internet and there again to different sites. It’s become difficult to become the one player that serves every need. As Jarvis has put it: “Do what you can do best. Link to everything that you cannot do as well”.

These are just a few changes that journalism is undergoing. But this changes – as difficult this is to see for some of the key players on the news market – can be a chance rather than a threat for journalism. As Shirky has put it “Here comes Everybody” . Journalism can evolve to a “Networked Journalism” to become what Beckett has called “Supermedia”.
Now, what exactly is Networked journalism? After all journalism has been about networking ever since. You had to get access to the news story and therefore every good journalist had to build a network or at least talk to people. But Networked journalism is more than that. To use Jeff Jarvis definition:

“Networked journalism takes into account the collaborative nature of journalism. Professionals and amateurs working together to get the real story, linking to each other and across brands and boundaries to share facts, questions, answers ideas and perspectives”.
Networked journalism is about tearing down the fortresses of old journalism and making it open to the public. Networked journalism is not about the product of a news story that is published but rather about the coming into being of that news story in a process. It is not about the gatekeeper of the journalist. After all the fences are coming down, so what sense is there for the journalist to stand in front of this gate? Networked journalism is about the journalist who gets into a dialogue with the public, is clear about his sources and becomes a public servant by engaging with the public. It is about transparency through connectivity.

This all may sound great, but how does it work practical? In order to turn the ideal of networked journalism into something that could be called “grounded theory” I want to refer to some examples that can show how different the interpretations of networked journalism can still be. The examples may serve as an illustration, that there is not one “Networked Journalism” but different approaches that try to create journalism that is more effective in the age of New Media: As examples I will turn to the new Broadcasting House of the BBC in Regent Street, the project “VJmovement” and finally the project “CitizenGlobal”.

1. Networked “Fortress Journalism”: The new Broadcasting House in Regent Street

The BBC just recently announced that they are planning on moving into a new broadcasting house” in Regent Street. There the BBC World Service will be able to join forces with domestic journalists. The new broadcasting house according to Horrocks will serve as a means to create synergistic effects between the different news departments. Meeting rooms, schedules etc. will be designed to foster this goal. Horrocks sees in this development an approach to get from fortress journalism to Networked journalism. This may be true to the inner organizations of the BBC. After all there exist a lot of small fortresses inside the big fortress. Noteworthy as this approach may seem this attempt seems to me to be more about strengthening the fortress from within. BBC is not talking about joining forces with other news agencies. Its about making BBC more effective. This is why I would call this first example “Networked Fortress Journalism”. Journalism that pretends to be more than a fortress but afterall is still about a fortress – even though this fortress may be more effective.

2. VJMovement.com – Networked Journalism 0.5



VJMovenemt.com is a news site that tries to open newsmaking to the public. At least they try to give their audience a chance to give their voice about what newsstories should be covered. The process works as follows: The audience can introduce topics that should be covered. Than there follows a discussion about what way the story should be covered. Than “professional” trained journalists take over and create the story. So the news conference is crowdsourced, the process of news making is still delegated to trained professionals. That’s why I would call this project to go just half the way of Networked Journalism. It is an honorable attempt to democratize news-making. But it is a half-hearted attempt nonetheless. It is Networked Journalism 0.5.

3. CitizenGlobal.com – Networked Journalism



The project CitizenGlobal is Networked Journalism In its full extend. The project works as follows. The audience can have a vote on which topics they would like to be made into a news story. After that CitizenGlobal asks its members for their participation. “GlobalCitizen” than collects videos from its member and puts it together into a newsstory. Complex issues like climate change that affect a lot of people can therefore be discussed on a global scale and the media that comes out of this project is beyond the scale that “fortress journalism” would be able to provide. On a project on climate change the project received contributions from 179 states. Good luck trying this with fortress journalism.

To come as a conclusion: The established news cooperations are facing sweeping changes. The advent of New Media brought with it a new kind of journalism: Networked journalism. But as the examples have shown – there is not just one Network Journalism. There are quite a few. And afterall some of them might not seem that new at all.