No abstract

No abstract

This study critically reflects on a schism evident in debates surrounding ‘humanitarian communication’. On one hand, it is approached as embodying an ideal of ethical practice. On the other, ideal humanitarianism is deployed as the grounds for a critique, whereby ‘humanitarian practice’ is seen as compromised by exigencies and political-economic influence. Drawing on the testimony of humanitarian communication practitioners within major international agencies, we argue this also reflects a felt tension within the field, where practitioners are very aware of the practical constraints and material influences to which they are subject. In both cases, however, an assumed opposition between the ‘practical’ and the ‘ethical’ tends to position ‘humanitarian ethics’ as an ahistorical ideal that stands apart from, and acts as a check on, instrumental action. This paper argues that a more historically grounded analysis suggests a more complex interrelationship between ethical and instrumental concerns.

In debates surrounding the role of universities in teaching journalism, a range of critical voices have stressed the importance of moving beyond the limiting frame of an assumed 'industry—academic dichotomy', while some also point to the structural forces that underpin the persistence of this frame. A consideration of such factors suggests that, while this critical move may be laudable, enacting such a shift in practice is likely to require more than simply good intentions or critical moralism. To this end, this article argues for an approach that considers how both educational and media institutions may be defined as key sites in the production of both journalists and audiences as 'public subjects'. Such a framework, it is argued, supports a more critical analysis of the role played by industry, practitioners and universities as active stakeholders in formations of journalistic professionalism, and the manner each are being impacted by trends toward 'professionalization'.

Using semi-structured interviews with Chinese data journalists across party and commercial media, this article assesses the structure and practice of data journalism in China. In doing this, it responds to calls for further studies of data journalism in non-western contexts. It finds that Chinese data journalists face some of the same pressures and challenges that have been documented in other countries, including limited access to data and the constraints imposed by the screen-size of smartphones. However, these were often exacerbated through a combination of social and systemic factors -to the point that their impact is qualitatively and quantitatively different. Simultaneously, however, we find that in some cases Chinese data journalists, at least amongst party media, were protected from pressures such as audience demand, and encouraged to focus on state-of-the-art work. We conclude that what has emerged is a form of 'data journalism with Chinese characteristics', and that these characteristics emerge from the interactions between systemic, newsroom and social factors.