This article in today's New York Times offers a pretty cool peak at the future of our research methods.

"Microsoft Begins a Push Into the Polling World"

For now, though, it had this to share:

"The response rate of landline-phone polls has plummeted from 36 percent in 1997 to just 9 percent in 2012, according to Pew, decreasing reliability and increasing costs."

Here's a more in-depth look at Mircrosoft's research projects. (I wonder if they'd like to share their data with us.)

"A Data-Driven Crystal Ball"

Relax with PhD comics

http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1745

Preliminar research topic

Changes on news media reports on immigration after presidential announcement of humanitarian crisis

On June 2^nd, 2014, President Obama issued a presidential memorandum where he stated that “the influx of unaccompanied alien children (UAC) across the southwest border of the United States has resulted in an urgent humanitarian situation requiring a unified and coordinated Federal response.” This announcement and the figures of children crossing the border (63,000 since October 2013 --twice as much as the previous period) have spurred a new wave of coverage of the undocumented immigration problem.

My research would pretend to find if news media reports on immigration have shifted their original position, either positively or negatively, after the presidential announcement.

 

Does gender affect reporting?

India is soon becoming the rape capital of the world. Everyday there are numerous women related violences that occur in the capital of India - Delhi. One such case that was sensationalized by the media in December 2013 was that of an innocent young girl who was brutally raped and murdered in a moving bus, while her friend was merciless beaten and left to tell the tale. The rape victim later died of her injuries, but left the country burning with rage. There were protests all over the country, which were joined in by women as well as men.

In a country which takes pride in its cultural background and gender stereotypes, I would like to study if men and women journalist covered this story differently. I would like to do a content analysis of the articles that were published in five major English dailies in India for the first three days after this unfortunate event occurred. 

Research Topic

For my research topic, I would like to compare how local and international media cover the same event, what are the approaches taken, the sources reached, the message emphasized. The study will try to understand whether or not the international media reinforces stigmas or stereotypes of that country as seen abroad. And also detect, if so, the role of the media in the development of any kind of bias.

One of those three events will be the subject of the research: (1) the protests that were taken in Brazil in June-July 2013; (2) the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), held in Rio de Janeiro in June 2012; or (3) the 2014 FIFA World Cup held in 12 brazilian cities in June-July 2014.

The idea is to analyze how one of the events is portrayed by the main newspapers in Brasil (one or two of the most read would be chosen) and by the international media. The international data for analysis has to be narrowed, but it could be collected from sources such as The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, El Pais, Clarin, Jornal de Noticias and by news agencies such as Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse.

Research Topic

In my advertising elective class this week we have been doing some reading on the issue attention cycle. The readings really struck a chord with me as it seems that every day the latest issue gets brought to our attention and then quickly fades from public consciousness. I'd like to see how I can implement the issue attention cycle into my research topic. I'd like to focus on researching how twitter accounts may play a role in this cycle. There have been studies about the amount of content newspapers produce while an issue is "hot," and even comparative studies between countries over long term issues such as global warming. I'd like to perform a study that focuses more on audience reaction to news and measure the amount of activity on twitter and attempt to identify if the audience follows the cycle to the degree that publishers follow the cycle in their coverage of an event. Does the audience dwell on an issue before mass media seems to move on from it? Is there a segment of the audience that attempts to make sure the issue stays in our minds. If so who are these public opinion leaders? Are they journalists, bloggers, or normal citizens? If the coverage is positive will social media coverage be positive as well? Basically, I'd like to compare the attention cycle of the news coverage of the event vs the attention cycle of twitter users. The event I would like to focus on is Ray Rice and domestic violence. I definitely need help narrowing this down and clearing it up. It still needs a bit of work.

The Lost Art of Verification

How consistent and to what degree are major newspapers exercising thorough, evenhanded verification practices when reporting stories of highly sensitive international conflict? Throughout Israel’s so-called Operation Protective Edge, a corresponding war of perception has been waged, one that can be boiled down to two symbolic and highly controversial words: human shields. 

Since the July offensive began, Israel and its supporters have repeatedly claimed in U.S. newspapers that Palestinians are being forcibly used as human shields. The problem is, no proof of that exists (“Israel/Gaza Conflict,” 2014). Even The New York Times acknowledged, “There is no evidence that Hamas and other militants force civilians to stay in areas that are under attack—the legal definition of a human shield under international law” (Barnard & Rudoren, 2014). Nevertheless, the unsubstantiated accusations persist. 

A content analysis will examine how often five national newspapers—The New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, and the Los Angeles Times—fail to meet minimal standards of verification, which would require that reporters, when accusing a group of using human shields, acknowledge that no proof actually exists. As the Pew Research Journalism Project says, “This discipline of verification is what separates journalism from other modes of communication, such as propaganda, fiction or entertainment” (“Principles of Journalism”). 

The content analysis will evaluate and code all accusations of “human shield” being used by newspapers in both its news and opinion sections. Some possible coding categories include: attributed to only one side in general; attributed to a government official from only one side of the conflict; attributed to unnamed sources; attributed to no one; and attributed without giving the opposing side an opportunity to respond.

This will be useful for media organizations that want to identify and avoid the clear bias caused by a lack of verification. News consumers would be interested in this research to learn whether newspapers are fulfilling their obligations when it comes to providing balanced, verified news.


Barnard, A. & Rudoren, J. News (2014, July 23). Israel Says That Hamas Uses Civilian Shields, Reviving Debate. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com

Israel/Gaza Conflict: Questions and Answers (2014, July 25). In Amnesty International. Retrieved from http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/israelgaza-conflict-questions-and-answers-2014-07-25

Principles of Journalism. (n.d.). In Pew Research Center. Retrieved September 28, 2014, from http://www.journalism.org/resources/principles-of-journalism/

What's worse than not getting published?

From: journalism

Date: 2013-07-23 17:29

To: chyi

CC: shellyshen_29

Subject: Call for paper -- 13th International Symposium on Online Journalism 2012

From Knowledge to Wisdom

Journalism and Mass Communication

Print ISSN: 2160-6579                            Current Volume: 3/2013

Dear Dr. Hsiang Iris Chyi,

This is the Journal of Journalism and Mass Communication (ISSN 2160-6579), an international academic journal published across the United States by David Publishing Company. I am pleased to learn you have submitted the paper titled

Are digital natives dropping print newspapers? A national survey of college newspaper advisers to the 13th International Symposium on Online Journalism 2012.

We are very interested in your research, if the paper mentioned has not been published in other journal or you have other unpublished papers in hand, please feel free to send electronic version to us. If you are interested in our journal, we also want to invite some people to be our reviewers or become our editorial board members. You can send your CV to us. Expect to get your reply soon.

The below is more information on our journal and some guidelines for you and you can know our journal at http://www.davidpublishing.com/journals_info.asp?jId=418

Descriptions

The Journal of Journalism and Mass Communication, a professional scholarly peer-reviewed academic journal, commits itself to promoting the academic communication about recent developments on Journalism and Mass Communication, covers all sorts of research on journalism, radio and television journalism, new media, news ethics and regulations, the integration of media and culture and other relevant areas, and tries to provide a platform for experts and scholars worldwide to exchange their latest findings.

The Journal of Journalism and Mass Communication is collected and indexed by the Library of U.S. Congress, on whose official website (http://catalog.loc.gov), an on-line inquiry can be triggered with their publication numbers, ISSN2160--6579 respectively, as keywords in “Basic Search” column. In addition, the journal is retrieved by some renowned databases:

★ Database of EBSCO, Massachusetts, USA

★ Chinese Database of CEPS, American Federal Computer Library center (OCLC), USA

★ Chinese Scientific Journals Database, VIP Corporation, Chongqing, P. R. China

★ Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory, USA

★ Pro Quest Social Science Collection, Public Affairs Information Service (PAIS), USA

★ Summon Serials Solutions, USA

★Universe Digital Library S/B, Malaysia

★Norwegian Social Science Data Services (NSD), Norway

Guidelines for Authors

1. Submission of Manuscript: The manuscript should be original, and has not been published previously. Do not submit material that is currently being considered by another journal. The manuscript should be in MS Word format, submitted as an email attachment to our email address: journalism@davidpublishing.org; journalism@davidpublishing.com

2. Some requirements : Manuscripts may be 3000-12000 words or longer if approved by the editor, including an abstract, texts, tables, footnotes, appendixes, and references. The title should be on page 1 and not exceed 15 words, and should be followed by an abstract of 100-200 words. 3-5 keywords or key phrases are required.

3. Transfer of Copyright Agreement: Authors of the articles being accepted are required to sign up the Transfer of Copyright Agreement form.

4. Hard Copies: Author will receive 2 hard copies of the journal containing their articles.

5. Publication Fee: We will charge some fee if the paper is published in our journal.

Editorial Procedures

All papers considered appropriate for this journal are reviewed anonymously by at least two outside reviewers. The review process usually takes two to three weeks. Papers are accepted for publication subject to no substantive, stylistic editing. The editor reserves the right to make any necessary changes in the papers, or request the author to do so, or reject the paper submitted. A copy of the edited paper along with the first proofs will be sent to the author for proofreading. They should be corrected and returned to the editor within seven days. Once the final version of the paper has been accepted, authors are requested not to make further changes to the text.

----

What is this really about? 

Pseudo-Academic Journals Proliferate Online

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-world-of-pseudo-academia.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

List of Predatory Publishers 2014 

http://scholarlyoa.com/2014/01/02/list-of-predatory-publishers-2014/

Research Topic

I am interested in examining how journalists use Twitter in a time of war, and more specifically: how Israeli and Palestinian journalists used this social networking site during 2014 Gaza War. 

During the 50 days of the war between Israel and Hamas, Twitter was a primary means of disseminating updates and sharing messages without filters of the mainstream media. However, mainstream media journalists were also active on this platform, offering their take on the war. As Twitter provides journalists with relatively new ways to communicate with citizens and with each other, it has also attracted scholarly attention. 

Previous research explored how news organizations and individual journalists use Twitter – whether in general or in specific contexts, such as political campaigns, US plane crash on the Hudson River and the Arab Spring. In addition, a book was published under the title: “Social Media Go to War: Rage, Rebellion and Revolution in the Age of Twitter.” However, limited attention seems to have been paid to journalistic practices and routines in a time of war, when journalists may face unique dilemmas and concerns. Furthermore, the ways in which Israeli and Palestinians journalists use Twitter have not been systematically investigated, as far as I know. I wish to try doing that by conducting a content analysis, though there may be several complications that I will need to address.

Reality.

Graduate school has just started for a month and I have been brought to face the cruel reality.

Journal paper is the only criterion for our scholarship, promotion and achievement. The number of getting your research being cited by others is more important than your teaching performance. A professor has NO LIFE until he/she gets the tenure. Reviewers could be really mean to your research. On average, only four people read your research paper. Half of the researches never get cited. Sound pessimistic, right? Academia is no longer a friendly and encouraging environment as I thought a month ago. Part of my fantasy of being a scholar has vanished, honestly.

Dr. Jensen pointed out “There is a lot of irrelevant research being done by a lot of self-indulgent professors.” and “researchers can easily advance careers not by asking important questions about how systems of power work, but by constructing complex models and methodologies.” I think it is the result of too much emphasis on publications. This is a structural, internal problem of the field, I guess. What can we do to change this? It all depends on our willingness to work for the society or ... just for getting our name out there.

I have heard many of my friends who are studying their doctoral degrees in engineering or mathematics are still deciding whether to work in the industry or stay in the academia after they graduate. For doctoral students in journalism and communication, however, we don't have this struggle. It seems like from the moment you get into a doctoral degree program in journalism or communication, you are “technically” detached from the practical journalistic world. I asked several mentors for advice on pursuing a Ph.D. and they all said, “If you want to do reporting, you should stay in the field and don't get a Ph.D.” Newsrooms do not care about what degrees you have. What makes things worse is that, a doctoral degree could sometimes give you a difficult time to go back to the profession field. It is because your skills may not be up-to-dated or your employers would doubt about what your passion really is. Therefore, I am not surprised by the research gap between professionals and scholars mentioned in the Knight Blog.

For The New York Times’ article, I agree that the relationship between theory and empirical data is not unbreakable. Human behavior is more complicated and dynamic than what the numbers and figures can show. Social sciences need to overcome their inferiority complex and take proud of our ways to prove things true.





My preliminary research topic

My preliminary research topic is to study the lifespan of tweets post by newsrooms. Popular tweets (or healthy tweets) are usually retweeted by many users and live active online longer. A popular tweet has a higher chance to reach out to followers and get them engaged with the news.

For different tweets, their lifespans (i.e., how long they will stay popular) vary. Only 6% of all tweets are retweeted and these retweets have a very short lifespan. But some tweets can stay active for as long as 48 hours. 

Questions I want to ask include: what kind of news content usually generate a healthy tweet and a sick tweet? What characteristics does a healthy tweet have (eg. numbers of followers, time of day you’re tweeting, etc.)? These are worthy questions to ask as they unravel how certain messages can go viral and engage readers better across social media.

preliminary research topic (revised)

Preliminary Research Topic (revised)

My research direction has changed a lot.

I would like to research on comparison between Presidential families in the U.S. and South Korea.

Korea has produced the first female President (Geun Hye Park) in 2012, who is the daughter of President Jung Hee Park who occupied the Presidency during 1970~80s. As they are the first father-daughter Presidents in Korea, I have recognized many Korean media have framed the President Park not only as a female politician but also as a “daughter” of the former President. And this fact stimulated my curiosity to compare Korea’s media coverage with the U.S.’s new coverage on one of recent Presidential families in the U.S., George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. (For example, I read an article from LA Times whose headline is “Bush’s legacy is partly his father’s.”)

I might examine:

During Presidential children’s presidency, how their fathers were portrayed (framed) on media coverage in the U.S. and in Korea?

(How media used “family” frames; including the direction and tones of media coverage)

How Presidential son and daughter are like or different from their fathers?

How media coverage on Presidential families in the U.S. and in Korea can be compared?

 

These are just rough ideas and they are subject to change and be detailed, of course..

 

 

Regarding the three articles..

Regarding the articles..

In Korea, when people become 2nd year in high school, they have to make a big decision between two different curriculum options: liberal arts and natural sciences. The decision is very influential in that they learn totally different subjects during high school and university years and no way to explore other options at all once they make a decision. In my family, interestingly, I was the only one who chose liberal arts curriculum. (To be honest, I had quite frequent conflicts with parents because of this.) My parents and my brother, who majored in engineering and pharmacy, still don’t understand what I am really studying. I know they believe that studying sciences is more practical, realistic, sophisticated, and valuable than studying liberal arts, including social sciences in a broad concept.

But as I learn social scientific approaches during college years and as they become absorbed in my ways of thinking gradually, I realize hard sciences and social sciences are just two different, disctinct fields of study and there is no reason to feel inferior or superior to each other. I remember that from the first day of our class, we concluded social science is science & human; thus I agree that in order to understand complicated human behaviors, just numbers and figures are not enough and there should be something BEYOND that to explain humans. As in the New York Times article, not “imitating the hard sciences” but admitting the inherent differences among the fields of study is essential.

In the same context, as professor Robert Jensen has argued, researchers should concentrate on human communities. I also chose journalism for this reason; studying “human” behaviors, attitudes, and thoughts in the media context seemed really intriguing to me. But as professor Jensen said, fully pursuing critical thinking and academic freedom in schools has some limitations due to corporate and practical demands.. Thus it is a regrettable reality as well in that Knight Blog pointed out lack of funding and marketing of journalism journals which lead to decreasing citations of journals and quality of research. One of professors from my undergraduate once confessed to his students that the discrepancy between what he wants to explore and what he actually can makes him really hard.

 

Though I'm just starting my graduate year just now, reading the three articles really made me think really seriously regarding my future research. To be frank, I am quite afraid to actually face this reality. I hope I can cope with it well throughout my masters and (future) doctoral years.

Preliminary topic

Research has shown that in large part, the digital strategies most newspapers have adopted since the New York Times went online in 1996 aren't working. Readers still prefer their content in a form that stains their fingers, as shown by the Newspaper Association of America here and here. 
Meanwhile, newspaper managers and editors have insisted that reporters constantly feed the online beast. Audience "clicks" drives the content for some free newspaper websites in hopes of attracting readers and maybe encouraging them to visit the paid website containing quality news content. Reporters receive metrics on the most popular stories, but overall data on how the company's digital strategy is rarely funneled down to the worker bees.
I'd like to find out how reporters truly feel about their management's digital strategy, if journalists believe they are fulfilling their role as a public servant, and what they know about the strategy's success.
I believe that I'd find that reporters are completely unaware of the scholarly research showing that digital is not working for newspapers, but do not support or believe in their company's online plan and are overall unhappy.
Findings from a study like this could show that some newspapers are completely doing digital wrong, including insisting that reporters carry out their ridiculous digital strategies and ignoring the valuable insight of reporters who interact with readers more often than management who craft the digital plans. This could be helpful as the industry struggles to find a way forward and attempts to morph into successful financial online enterprises.