Media Work as Field Advancement: The Case of Science Media Center Germany

Abstract

In the wake of the news industry’s digitization, novel organizations that differ considerably from traditional media firms in terms of their functional roles and organizational practices of media work are emerging. One new type is the field repair organization, which is characterized by supporting high-quality media work to compensate for the deficits (such as those which come from cost savings and layoffs) which have become apparent in legacy media today. From a practice-theoretical research perspective and based on semi-structured interviews, virtual field observations, and document analysis, we have conducted a single case study on Science Media Center Germany (SMC), a unique non-profit news start-up launched in 2016 in Cologne, Germany. Our findings show that, in addition to field repair activities, SMC aims to facilitate progress and innovation in the field, which we refer to as field advancement. This helps to uncover emerging needs and anticipates problems before they intensify or even occur, proactively providing products and tools for future journalism. This article contributes to our understanding of novel media organizations with distinct functions in the news industry, allowing for advancements in theory on media work and the organization of journalism in times of digital upheaval.

Organizations as Innovations: Examining Changes in Journalism Through the Lens of Newly-Emerging Organizations

“…In this, they differ from the likes of bloggers, influencers, and organizations such as Wikileaks, which were often regarded more as a threat in field-centered journalism research (Eldridge, 2019). Among these remarkable organizational innovations are cases such as the for-profit journalism tech consultancy start-up Hearken (Crispim da Fontoura, 2021), the non-profit media start-up Science Media Center Germany (SMC) as a supporting organization for the work of science journalists (Buschow et al, 2022), and the discontinued Civil, a blockchain-technology-based journalism platform (Le & Loebbecke, 2020).…”

“…This shift is characterized by decoupling and repackaging certain activities of journalistic production, traditionally bundled in legacy media companies, into novel organizational units. One organization driving such change in the field is SMC, a non-profit meta-organization that exerts "field repair" and "field advancement" activities (Buschow et al, 2022).…”

“…The emergence of similar organizations marks the proliferation and stabilization of certain trends and, over time, reveals some remarkable broader changes in journalism. For example, SMC can already be seen as a blueprint for followers, as it is part of a larger global movement of science media centers in, among other countries, Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand (Buschow et al, 2022). Even if these organizations differ in nuances, they mark a gradual institutionalization of an innovative infrastructure support system that reshapes work in (science) journalism.…”

Knowledge broker, trust broker, value broker: The roles of the Science Media Center during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…An account by an editorial lead of the now inactive SMC Japan describes the difficulties of finding a balanced pool of experts after the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 (Tanaka, 2015). Other literature describes SMCs in terms of their potential benefit for health communication (Rödder, 2014), the foundation of SMC Germany (Rödder, 2015), the theoretical identification of SMCs as boundary organizations (Rödder, 2020), and innovators that work to repair and enhance the field of journalism (Buschow et al, 2022).…”

“…Over the past decades, SMCs have spread internationally with organizations taking root in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Germany. Though SMCs and their potential impact on science communication have been discussed in the literature (Callaway, 2013;Rödder, 2014Rödder, , 2015Rödder, , 2020, their practices have rarely been empirically studied (Broer, 2020;Broer & Pröschel, 2021;Buschow, Suhr, & Serger, 2022;Tanaka, 2015;Williams & Gajevic, 2013).…”