Transformative Journalisms: How the ecological crisis is transforming journalism

Abstract

Growing awareness of global ecological crises has provoked a set of new practices in journalism that we suggest labelling transformative journalisms. The term encompasses a diversity of new role conceptions and practices that converge around an explicit and transparent commitment to contribute to the social-ecological transformation of societies by doing journalism. It is thus a form of advocacy journalism that is special in being dedicated to the most common of common goods, preserving the eco-systems and natural resources of the planet. Transformative journalism challenges some aspects of objectivity, such as the idea of the neutral, distanced observer. Instead, it emphasizes the elements of relevant and factually correct coverage as well as values such as transparency about values and moderating the debates that enable society to develop more sustainable ways of life. While the tension between the poles of being a critical, independent observer and sharing a mission of ecological transformation is the source of criticism by proponents of more traditional role conceptions, we also see this tension as a productive source for creativity, complementing traditional journalism with new forms of content, production, and interactions audiences as well as increased awareness of the ecological footprint of doing journalism.

The trouble with ‘quiet advocacy’: local journalism and reporting climate change in rural and regional Australia

“…Such advocacy has indeed been identified as an 'important guiding concept' for environmental journalism (Fahy, 2017). Other scholars have argued that ecological crisis is now leading to a transformation of journalism more broadly, a trend that Brüggemann et al (2022) have described as 'transformative journalisms'. For these authors, this involves 'an explicit and transparent commitment to contribute to the social-ecological transformation of societies by doing journalism'.…”

Science in motion: A qualitative analysis of journalists’ use and perception of preprints

“…However, we also identified other journalistic practices, such as actively seeking out preprint research and orchestrating one's own peer review, that have not been described in previous studies. Similarly, we found no evidence of journalists advocating for social transformation or engaging audiences in dialogue, both of which are practices that have been associated with post-normal science communication in previous scholarship [20,28,30,31]. More research is needed to better understand why journalists adopt certain communication practices in some post-normal contexts and not others, and what issues these novel practices might raise for their audiences.…”

“…Passive methods: receiving press releases, pitches, PR materials, news alerts [23][24][25] Active methods: accessing research through academic search tools, social media, specific journals, or contact with researchers [23,26,27] Accurately portray "tensions and dissensions" within science by incorporating perspectives from researchers and stakeholders on all sides of the issue; describing expert concerns; communicating scientific uncertainties [28,29] Engage audiences by encouraging public comments/feedback, making data and information directly available, acting as a "dialogue" or "knowledge broker" [28][29][30] Interpret science by putting research into context, describing the process of science (not just results); widening perspectives on polarized debates; highlighting policy implications; considering long-term outcomes [20,[29][30][31] Strive for reflexivity; call objectivity into question; incorporate subjective feelings/views; be transparent about values; frame differing perspectives as context-specific rather than competing [20,29,31] Advocate for common goods and/or social transformations [20,31] Critically discuss solutions, rather than simply reporting what is wrong [31] Verify research Assess quality-related factors, such as "whether the research was sound, whether the source was reputable" [26] Corroborate or critique study claims through commentary from unaffiliated experts [23,25] Triangulate statistics and findings by comparing them with those of other credible sources [25]…”

Neutral Observers or Advocates for Societal Transformation? Role Orientations of Constructive Journalists in Germany

“…According to Brüggemann et al (2020), today's "post-normal situation" with the urgency for rapid action is already leading parts of science journalism and academia to increasingly behave as advocates for public goods and reject the role of the detached observer. It is plausible to assume that constructive journalism is also emerging for exactly the same reason-and in this context might be better understood by the term "transformative journalism" (Brüggemann et al, 2021;Krüger, 2022) because it ultimately aims to fundamentally change socio-economic structures. This study might thus be seen as a snapshot of boundary work within a process of renegotiating journalism's identity and place in a society facing an existential crisis.…”