Abstract

Through a framework from the sociology of occupations, this study examines the consequences of increasing audience participation in journalism processes. This framework suggests that increased transparency between readers and journalists may weaken the occupation's authority. A weakening of exclusive authority in the eyes of the public may leave the jurisdictional area of journalism vulnerable to rival occupations, such as bloggers. The challenge from this budding activity suggests news audiences have continued to broaden their perceptions of what constitutes news, as findings from this study predict.

Introduction

The call for a more egalitarian relationship between the news media and audiences, while not new,¹ has gathered steam over the last decade. News organizations have invented a variety of ways to increase audience participation in the journalistic process (Durocher, 1998; Kennamer & South, 2003; Kurpius, 2002; Lasica, 2003a; Lieberman, 2001; Oppel, 1997). Increased interest in reader participation has also derived from the unique characteristics of online media, which allow dialogue among news readers, interaction between readers and news sources, and personalized news. Most recently, a small but growing group of "witnesses to news" have been instantly publishing stories, images, and commentary on online weblogs, and a number of media organizations have published and linked to this material (Lasica, 2003a; Outing, 2003; Singer, 2004). Such trends have been heralded as part of a new age of participatory journalism in which journalism's "hegemony as gatekeeper of the news is threatened…potentially, by the audience it serves" (Peskin, 2003, p. 13).

Calls for a closer journalist-reader relationship also reflect concern over a growing disconnect between the values of journalists and audiences (ASNE, 1999; Pew Research Center, 2002b). The Web has been seen by some journalists and scholars as a remedy for this problem because it can make the journalistic process more transparent to readers: "Many readers hunger to understand how journalists work. What better place to pull back the curtain than on the Web?" (Lanson, 2000, p. 2).

Through a framework from the sociology of occupations, this study examines the consequences of pulling back the curtain—i.e., of increasing audience participation in journalism processes. This framework suggests that increased transparency between readers and journalists may not be entirely beneficial. Increased transparency may weaken the occupation's authority as well as its "specialness" in the eyes of the public. And although not assessed directly here, a weakening of exclusive authority in the eyes of the public may leave the jurisdictional area of journalism vulnerable to rival occupations (Abbott, 1988; Nilson, 1979). This study also explores the degree to which audiences are using participatory functions as they seek news on the Internet, as well as predictors of this use.

Background

Disconnect Between Journalists and Audience

Audience mistrust of the news media is not new-during the 1980s there was deep concern in the industry over a perceived credibility crisis. This concern waned, as studies revealed greater public support than originally believed (Gaziano, 1988; Izard, 1985), but in recent studies dissatisfaction with journalists has been on the rise again (ASNE, 1999; Durocher, 1999; Pew Research Center, 2002b, 2003). Findings reveal a gap between journalists' and audiences' perceptions of journalists' ethics, values, and qualifications (Pew Research Center, 2002b).

This growing disconnect between audience and journalists has coincided with the growing presence of online news. Use of the Internet for news increased markedly in the late 1990s, especially among younger audiences (Flanagin & Metzger, 2000; Pew Research Center, 2000a, 2000b), though this growth slowed somewhat after 2000 (Pew Research Center, 2002a). Some have expressed concern that online news, with its relentless pace and easy access to rumor, could be contributing to the decline in perceived journalism credibility (Abdullah, Garrison, Salwen, Driscoll, & Casey, 2002; Nadarajan & Ang, 1999; Ruggiero & Winch, 2005), but recent studies show a growing public acceptance of online news (Flanagin & Metzger, 2000; Johnson & Kaye, 2002; Pew Research Center, 2000a).

Despite worries about inaccuracy and rumor in online journalism (Flanagan & Metzger, 2000; Fouhy, 2000; Ruggiero & Winch, 2005; Tewksbury & Althaus, 2000), online news enthusiasts view direct access to information and increased control by audiences as natural and desirable (Lanson, 2000; Lasica, 2003b; Outing, 2003; Rich, 1999; Singer, 2003a; South, 1999). There is a widespread perception that transparency between industry and audience can lead to a more equal, communicative relationship between them and to a more open public discussion (Andrews, 2003; Schultz, 1999; Singer, 2003a). Transparency may be economically advantageous to the industry as well. As one newspaper owner puts it, "if we don't have accountability, we're going to lose readers—and that means a whole bunch of nasty things like losing advertisers and ultimately going out of business" (Durocher, 1998, p. 1).

Access to Occupational Knowledge and the Impact on Control Over Work

Greater transparency could, however, work quite differently than its proponents believe. "Lifting the curtain" through online journalism could lead audiences to challenge the authority of journalism, and there is reason to believe that Internet use for "disintermediative" purposes has eroded the authority of other professionals. Here the term disintermediation refers to removing the middleman for professional knowledge (e.g., Danner, 1998; Shapiro & Leone, 2001) rather than for goods and services (e.g., Schmitz, 2000). For example, Kritzer (1999) discusses the weakening of lawyers' professional status due to the ability of non-lawyers to search for legal information through the Web. Similarly, Hardy (1999), Lowrey and Anderson (2004), and Pastore (2001) found that patients with greater access to online medical information were more likely to challenge physicians' authority. Haug (1977) speculates that greater public access to knowledge through "computerization" and the techniques of obtaining this knowledge will mean a drop in status for many professions. In the eyes of clients, professions in such a situation become "just another commercial vendor" (p. 225).

Literature from the sociology of work and occupations provides a useful framework for looking at this issue of occupational control. According to the "systems perspective" in the sociology of professions literature, occupations challenge one another for control over areas of work, and it is assumed that control over a work area's knowledge base is a key to maintaining jurisdiction (Abbott, 1988). If an occupation's grip over a work area is loosened, then the result is not necessarily a more open and egalitarian society-there may simply be a shift in the power structure of occupations. For example, journalists presently have a measure of control over the work of informing the public. If this control weakens, then rival occupations such as public relations practitioners or politicians may benefit (Dooley, 1999).

An important indicant of the degree to which occupations can control work is the exclusivity of the occupation's knowledge base. The less rule-bound and routine an occupation's knowledge base is, the more difficult it is for outsiders to follow these rules and perform the work (Child & Fulk, 1982; Nilson, 1979; Simpson, 1985). As Van Maanen and Barley (1985) say, "[a]ll occupational groups rely on ill-defined procedures and techniques as the sort of mystical heart of the practice, a heart that, to keep beating, must remain protected." Semi-professions such as school teaching, nursing, and librarianship are vulnerable because their occupational knowledge base does not extend far beyond what the public knows, or thinks it could learn (Etzioni, 1969; Simpson, 1985).

Journalism and Occupational Control

By this estimation, journalism is closer to semi-professional status than professional status. Journalism appears to have a less arcane, less complex knowledge base than professions with higher status such as law, medicine, or engineering. A common view in the news construction literature is that journalistic professionalism is based on knowledge of routines needed to accomplish work within organizational constraints (e.g., Fishman, 1980; Gans, 1979; Shoemaker, Eichholz, Kim, & Wrigley, 2001; Tuchman 1978). Journalists themselves tend to see their work as non-routine, and they portray the news as constituting random events in a complex world (Schudson, 1992).

Structurally, the boundaries around the work of journalism are relatively "uninsulated" (Schudson, 1978). Journalism has no well-defined protective structure such as licensure or accreditation, although the First Amendment of the United States Constitution offers some protection (Singletary, 1982; Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996).² Journalists are instead heavily reliant on cultural legitimacy, or legitimacy in the eyes of the public. As with many professions (Dean, 1992; Gitlin, 1977; Nilson & Edelman, 1979; Swetnam, 1992), journalism has strengthened its cultural legitimacy from positive portrayals in movies, TV shows, and books, and journalists tend to reframe their own public history in a positive light (Schudson, 1992; Zelizer, 1997). To news workers, "news judgment is the sacred knowledge, the secret ability of the newsman which differentiates him from other people" (Tuchman, 1978, p. 672).

Such an argument suggests that journalists would not be anxious to render their work processes and decision-making transparent through increased online access, despite the call for transparency by online news enthusiasts. Indeed, many online news operations have been slow to offer audiences means of interacting with journalists, sources, and other audience members, despite rhetoric to the contrary (Lowrey, 2003; Singer, 2002). Traditionally journalists have been somewhat dismissive of audiences and most concerned with coworker and management approval (Gans, 1978; McQuail, 1997; Schudson, 1992; Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996).

Research Questions

The notion of occupational disintermediation and theories of occupational control suggest that increased transparency may erode the perception that journalists have ultimate authority over the work of gathering and reporting information to the public. First, it should be determined to what degree the public thinks journalists have exclusive control over their knowledge base.

RQ1: To what degree do individuals perceive journalistic work to be too complex for non-journalists to perform?

In order to explain variability in this public perception of journalistic work, determinants are assessed. The determinant of key interest is degree to which readers use "participatory" functions of the Internet in seeking news. Participatory functions are those that let online news seekers bypass or reshape the traditional news product. These include: chat rooms and forums, which facilitate exchange of news information among non-journalists; journalists' email links, which allow readers to "talk back" to journalists; Web sites and email links of potential expert sources, which allow readers access to the raw material journalists use to construct the traditional news; and personalized news selection on the Web, which makes it easier for readers to serve as their own news editors. Greater use of these participatory functions should lead to increased transparency between media and audiences. Because users of these functions are practicing journalism-like tasks, some of the mystery surrounding the occupation and its knowledge base should diminish. Users contacting sources or visiting their Web sites are doing the work of newsgathering, users personalizing their home pages with news choices are making editing decisions, and users who chat on issues, or email sources and journalists, are editorializing. Also, directly discussing stories with journalists should make journalists seem more approachable. These readers are "peeking behind the curtain" and should view the work processes of journalism as less difficult for non-journalists to perform.

The literature suggests other potential determinants of the public perception of journalism. Socio-economic status (SES), age, and political beliefs should play a role. Those at a higher SES level—defined here as higher education and income—should be more likely to feel they could do the job of journalism and should generally have less "awe" of the occupation. Older respondents should be more willing to challenge journalists because of their years of experience with the news and their greater experience with social and political issues and systems. Respondents were also asked about their political beliefs, as it is expected that those with more conservative political beliefs would be more challenging of traditional journalism. According to a recent Pew Research Center poll (2004), Republicans are more critical of media performance and skeptical of accuracy than are Democrats. Finally, respondents were asked if they had ever worked or studied in the field of journalism. These predictors were assessed in an effort to answer the second research question:

RQ2: What factors best explain variability in the degree to which individuals perceive journalistic work to be too complex for non-journalists to perform?

The definition of "journalistic work" in these first two research questions derives from Abbott's (1988) discussion of professionals' diagnoses, inferences, and treatments. Journalistic work involves (1) diagnosis, which is the task of deciding what information society and audiences need, (2) inference, or the task of investigating current events in light of the diagnosis, and (3) treatment, or the production (writing, layout, etc.) of this information for social consumption (a similar depiction of journalistic work has been used by Dooley, 1999). "Journalists" are defined here in terms of the traditional public perception—they are the employees of media organizations who conduct the diagnosis, inference, and treatment associated with disseminating information to society.

Finally, the extent of participatory use of the Internet is explored, as well as predictors of this use. Some research has described extent of participatory uses—i.e., use of chat rooms, email links to journalists and sources, and personalized browsers (e.g., Pew Center, 2000a; Singer, 2002)—but few studies have focused on determinants of this use (Lowrey, 2003). Knowing more about who is likely to use participatory functions should help predict future use. Therefore, the predictor "Internet Use" (which focuses on participatory uses) will be treated as a dependent variable as well.

RQ3: To what degree do readers pursue participatory methods on the Internet to obtain news information?

RQ4: What factors explain variability in participatory use of the Internet to obtain news information?

Methods

Data for this pilot study were obtained from a December 2001 telephone survey of a random sample of households with telephones in the Baton Rouge, Louisiana, metropolitan area. The metro area was defined as the population of the four major parishes (the name for counties in Louisiana) in Baton Rouge. Baton Rouge is more politically and socially conservative than its more famous sister city in Louisiana, New Orleans (Jennings, 1999), and is comparable to other areas in the United States in terms of income per capita (Baton Rouge = $17,799; national average = $20,710), median age (Baton Rouge = 31.7; national average = 34.3), education (percentage of population with graduate degrees—Baton Rouge = 9.29; national average = 8.26), and unemployment rate (Baton Rouge = 4.78; national average = 4.44) (MSN, 2004).

Because of the exploratory nature of the study, a local rather than a national study was conducted. It was thought that surveying the area local to the researcher's university would improve response rate. It should be noted that these results are generalizable only to the four parishes from which the study was drawn.

The survey was pre-tested on 37 university students and eight older non-students. The final survey was conducted through the Survey Research Unit of the Social Science Research Center at the lead investigator's university. Households were selected using random digit dialing procedures, and within a household an adult (over 17 years old) was randomly selected by asking to interview the person in the household with the next birthday. Interviews took respondents approximately 10 to 12 minutes to complete. After discounting non-working phone numbers, there were 1,463 households in the sample. Of these, 990 were not completed after three callbacks (busy, answering machine, no answer), and 67 were refusals. There were 406 completed interviews for a response rate of 57%. The sampling error for the data set is no larger than ± 4.9%.

Respondents were asked three questions designed to measure the dependent variable Perception of Journalism Expertise, which is defined as the degree to which the public thinks journalistic work is complex and would be difficult for non-journalists to perform. Three survey items measured accessibility of this knowledge, and each of these items had a five-point scale (strongly disagree = 1, strongly agree = 5): "I think the average journalist needs a great deal of training before he or she can do an acceptable job of covering the news" (mean = 4.34, s.d. = .88); "I think it is possible for me to gather enough knowledge from sources other than news organizations to develop opinions about a news topic" (mean = 2.92, s.d. = 1.22); "How difficult would it be for you to master the knowledge needed to become a journalist?" (mean = 3.39, s.d. = 1.42).

A fourth item measures perception of the social standing of the occupation: "How important do you think journalists are for our society?" (mean = 4.16, s.d. = 1.04). This item is conceptually related to the first three items because it measures a perception of journalism's status, but it is somewhat distinct because it is does not specifically measure the perceived exclusivity of journalism's knowledge base.

The key predictor, Internet Use, is measured by summing six measures of the use of Internet functions (alpha = .70) Measures were originally scored on five-point scales, but the measures had very low means and small standard deviations, and each was therefore recoded as 1 = any use, 0 = no use. These six dichotomous measures were: (1) Seek news from sites other than traditional news sites (defined in the survey question as sites produced by news organizations), (2) Email journalists to discuss news topics, (3) Email experts who are not journalists to get information about news topics, (4) Participate in discussions about news topics through online chat groups, bulletin boards, listservs, or forums, and (5) Personalize news or news links on own browser page, and (6) Seek news from traditional news Web sites. "Traditional news sites" were defined in a survey question as sites "produced by news organizations." Nontraditional news sites were defined in a survey question as "sites not produced by news organizations, such as government, university, non-profit, corporate and personal sites."

The first five of these items measure participatory use in a straightforward way—that is, they assess whether readers gain information in active ways such as gathering their own information or personalizing the selection of news stories viewed. The last measure, seeking news from traditional news Web sites, assesses a more passive use, but it is assumed that mere exposure to mainstream news organization sites offers access to participatory functions as well.³ The mean for this summed measure is 1.45, and the standard deviation is 1.62. Internet Use is also treated as a dependent variable in Research Questions 3 and 4.

Demographic predictors of Perception of Journalism Expertise included income (56.7% made $50,000 or less), education level (38% had at least a bachelor's degree) and age (mean = 44.29, s.d. = 17.14). Respondents were also asked about their political beliefs, and 58.8% said they were conservative. Finally, 14.1% said they had worked or studied in a journalism-related field; these results may have reflected the presence of a nationally recognized school of mass communication nearby.

Predictors of Internet Use are suggested by studies of Internet use (Gardner & Oswald, 2001; Johnson & Kaye, 2000; Nie & Erbring, 2000; Pew Research Center, 2000a, 2002a). These include age, income, education level, and patterns of overall media use. Previous work or school experience in the field of journalism was also tested as a predictor of Internet Use.

Findings

Findings were mixed in regard to the first research question, which asks about perceptions of the exclusive expertise of journalists. In general, respondents had a high opinion of the occupational knowledge base of journalism, as well as the importance of journalism to society. About 90% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that journalists needed a "great deal of training" to do an acceptable job of covering the news. More than 75% said they thought journalists were important or very important for society. Yet just under half of the respondents said they thought it would be difficult to master the knowledge base necessary to become a journalist. This finding seems to contradict the perception that journalists need a great deal of training to perform their job. It may be that although audiences believe the knowledge base is complex, they also doubt it is necessary to master the knowledge base completely in order to do journalism on a daily basis. Almost 40% of respondents said they agreed or strongly agreed that they could form opinions on news topics based on information that did not derive from news organizations. About a third said they could not (disagreed or strongly disagreed).

Research Question 2 asks about factors associated with variability in Perception of Journalism Expertise. A bivariate analysis was conducted in which Internet Use and individual demographic factors were correlated with each of the four dependent measures (Table 1). Results show that Mastering Knowledge is most strongly related to predictors, with Internet Use, Age, Education, Political Orientation and Worked in Journalism all testing as significantly related. The more audiences used the Internet in participatory ways to obtain news, the more likely they were to think they could master the journalism knowledge base. Also, respondents who were younger, better educated, more liberal, and who had worked or studied in journalism were all significantly more likely to think they could master the occupational knowledge base of journalism with little difficulty.

Internet Use was not significantly related to Require Training, Develop Opinions or to Societal Importance. In fact, among all predictors, only Age had a significant relationship with any of these three dependent variables—the younger the respondents, the more likely they were to think they could develop news opinions without using information from traditional news organizations.

When Mastering Knowledge was regressed on predictors, Education and Age tested as the only significant predictors (Table 2). Apparently youth and higher education levels lead to an increased confidence in the ability to master the knowledge base of the journalism occupation. Internet Use was not significantly related when controlling for rival predictors. The model explains 10% of the variance in Mastering Knowledge, suggesting there are strong predictors not assessed in this analysis.

The third research question asked about the extent of participatory uses of the Internet. In general, respondents reported being infrequent users of these features. Less than 15% of respondents used chat rooms (23.6% of those saying they use the Internet at all), and around 17% personalized their browsers for news information (27.6% of Internet users). Around 13% emailed journalists and experts who were not journalists (about 20% of Internet users). There was substantial use of non-journalistic Web sites for news—around 40% of all respondents and 65% of Internet users.

Overall use of the Internet was fairly frequent. Just over 55% of the respondents said they used the Internet at least one to three days per week, and around 35% said they did not use the Internet at all. Almost half of all respondents said they ever looked for news on traditional news Web sites, with more then 30% saying they sought news on news Web sites at least one to three days per week. By comparison, nearly 95% said they sought news through some type of media at least one to three days per week. Among Internet users only, more than half said they sought news on news Web sites at least one to three days per week.

Research Question 4 seeks explanation for variability in the participatory use of the Internet for news. Five predictors were proposed: education, income, age, whether one worked or studied in a journalism-related field, and frequency of overall media use. According to the bivariate analyses, all factors were related to Internet Use, although Age, Worked in Journalism and Education are most highly related (Table 3). Apparently, those who use participatory functions the most are younger, better educated, and wealthier. Secondarily, they also tend to be heavier media users overall and to have a journalism background.

A regression analysis was also performed with Internet Use as the dependent variable, and education, income, age, work in journalism, and media use as predictors (Table 4). The regression model explains just under 23% of the variance in Internet Use. The dominant predictors are Age and Work in Journalism, but Media Use and Education are also significant predictors. Only income is not significantly related to degree of participatory Internet use.

Discussion

These findings suggest that audiences are not defining news in a narrow manner. Around two-thirds of survey respondents who use the Internet seek news information from sites that are not traditional news sources, and more than a quarter are likely to personalize news on their browsers. Although this study is limited by the survey's age (December 2001), the results have relevance to today's readers. With the rise in popularity of weblogs since this survey was conducted, the traditional concept of news is being further blurred and redefined (Lasica, 2003b).

However, it is clear that audiences are not challenging the social role of journalists. The results suggest only limited support for the idea that using participatory online news functions makes journalistic work seem less exclusive. The minority who do pursue these activities (emailing journalists, emailing sources, chatting online) generally are not more likely to see the work of journalism as easier to perform, though there was support for this relationship in the bivariate analysis. Results also suggest that respondents have a high opinion of journalism as an occupation, and that they think the occupation is based on a complex knowledge base.

At the same time, respondents do not generally view the knowledge base as inaccessible. Most respondents can conceive of performing the work of journalism, either as journalists or as non-journalists seeking information to feed opinions. Journalism seems to rank with other "semi-professions" such as library work and teaching: The work is respected but is not perceived as particularly unapproachable or intimidating.

This is an important trend to watch because a particularly strong determinant of participatory online news functions is youth, which suggests that audiences are likely to continue to become more comfortable with such functions. Youth is also significantly related to perceived ability to master the journalism knowledge base and to form opinions from non-traditional news sources. These results portend future challenges to the ability of the occupation to define the already fuzzy boundaries of what constitutes news and to have influence over access to its knowledge base.

According to theories of occupational competition (Abbott, 1988), if journalists' control over their knowledge base diminishes and if their control over the definition of news diminishes, then rival occupations such as public relations practitioners or politicians may benefit. Media content produced by politicians and public relations practitioners, which may blur the line between "news" and promotion, may be lumped by the public into the same category as traditional news media. The recent political conventions are examples of such "pseudo-events" (Clark, 2004). Similarly, a public that is likely to seek non-traditional news sources and which challenges the professional knowledge of traditional journalists may be more likely to view weblogs as legitimate news.

Though some journalists have welcomed blogging as a way to "lift the curtain" and reconnect with readers (Andrews, 2003; Lasica, 2003b), blogging is considered by some to be a rival occupation to journalism (Park, 2004; Reynolds, 2003). The challenge from this budding activity suggests news audiences have continued to broaden their perceptions of what constitutes news, as findings from this study predict. Blogging has gained a foothold partly because of journalism's weakened connection to readers, and this is not an uncommon way for occupations to evolve (e.g., chiropractors took advantage of traditional medicine's failure to help back problems [Abbott, 1988]). Bloggers benefit from their ability to peek behind the curtain of the journalism profession, though weblogging does not demystify all aspects of journalism. Indeed, bloggers represent only a partial challenge to traditional journalism because they do not frequently do original reporting (Blood, 2003; Reynolds, 2003). Moreover, when they do, verification is difficult, as with the flap over the story of President George W. Bush's military record by 60 Minutes (Strupp, 2004). In the language of the sociology of professions (Abbott, 1988), this means bloggers typically abdicate the work of diagnosing and inferring the needs of audiences and society. They skip straight to "treatment," which in their case consists largely of commentary on issues and links to other blogs and news sites. Audiences are not likely to place a great deal of trust in an occupation that relies mostly on second-hand diagnoses. Because of the advantages organizations offer traditional journalists, bloggers are likely to continue to rely heavily on reporting from traditional journalism (Reynolds, 2003).

The findings from this study suggest that audiences are open to fairly broad definitions of "journalism." To the extent that the work of journalism becomes defined as commentary rather than reporting, the budding occupation of blogging may gain some control (Reynolds, 2003; Singer, 2003b). This is because occupations are weakened when they allow rival occupations to alter the definition of their work area (Abbott, 1988; Van Maanen & Barley, 1984). Yet there is evidence that mainstream news organizations are redefining, or co-opting, the blogging movement (Singer, 2004; Smolkin, 2004). The occupations of public relations and marketing have also made moves to co-opt blogging, producing promotional material made to look like weblogs (Reynolds, 2003).

Certainly more investigation of audience use and perception of participatory journalism such as blogging is needed (Delwiche, 2004; Singer, 2004). Study findings here suggest that the general audience has not clamored for more direct interaction with journalists and their sources, and this may well be the case with blogging. This may be due to individuals' lack of time and expertise. As Singer (1998) suggests, in a world in which individuals were responsible for reporting and interpreting their own news, journalism would be quickly reinvented if only to stem the chaos.

Also, the larger competitive system of professions in which journalism is situated should be investigated. For example, a study that compares how Web users view both journalists and their occupational rivals—such as PR practitioners or politicians—could be insightful. A longitudinal approach would shed light on changes across time in the degree to which audiences confer authority on journalists and their rivals. It would also be intriguing to track efforts by journalism and public relations to co-opt the blogging movement, and the system of professions perspective would provide a helpful framework.

Initial findings from this study suggest that further research on "pulling back the curtain" of journalistic work is needed. The issue bears watching, particularly given the increasing emphasis in the profession on expanding audience participation in the journalistic process and the subtly shifting definition of what constitutes news.

Notes

1. Strains of democratic theory have portrayed the diminishment of journalistic control as a necessary condition for more open and equal public discussion. Habermas (1962) argued, as others had argued before him (e.g., Brecht, 1932; Mills, 1956), that the mass media's hierarchical format silences feedback. Media critics have expressed concern over the apathetic arm-chair audience and the erosion of educated social and political debate (Mills, 1956; Postman, 1985).
2. Some may consider the First Amendment such a structure, but it is somewhat vague and does not specifically safeguard the occupation of journalism, as it came to be understood today (Singletary, 1982).
3. Although it is anticipated that readers will encounter some participatory options on mainstream news sites, the authors recognize that much traditional online news is not participatory. Therefore the scaled Internet Use variable was constructed without the measure of traditional news site use, for comparison sake. Regression and correlation analyses were conducted with the new variable, and differences were negligible (for example, when regressing Perception of Expertise, beta coefficients for the significant predictors "education" and "age" were -.194 and .179 in the new analysis, compared to -.195 and .181 in the original analysis. When the new Internet Use was regressed on predictors, differences were minimal, with the greatest difference being the predictive strength of Education (.125 in the new analysis compared to .151 in the original). Even this change is small, and both the original and new coefficients predict significantly, although not strongly.

References

Abbott, A. (1988). The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Abdullah, R., Garrison, B., Salwen, M., Driscoll, P. & Casey, D. (2002). The credibility of newspapers, television news and online news. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Journalism and Mass Communication, Miami, Fla., August 7-10.

Andrews, P. (2003). Is blogging journalism? Nieman Reports, 57 (3), 63-64.

American Society of Newspaper Editors (1999). Examining our credibility. Retrieved May 3, 2005 from http://www.asne.org/kiosk/reports/99reports/1999examiningourcredibility/index.htm

Blood, R. (2003). Weblogs and journalism: Do they connect? Nieman Reports, 57 (3), 61-63.

Brecht, B. (1932). The radio as an apparatus of communication. Retrieved August 12, 2003 from FreeUK Web site: http://home.freeuk.com/lemmaesthetics/brecht1.htm

Child, J., & Fulk, J. (1982). Maintenance of occupational control: The case of professions. Work and Occupations, 7 (1), 1-30.

Clark, R. P. (2004, July 26). How to cover a pseudo-event. Poynter Online. Retrieved August 1, 2004 from http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=68864&sid=50

Danner, R.A. (1998). Redefining a profession. Law Library Journal, 90 (3), 315-356.

Dean, M. (1992). Nursing's identity crisis. Lancet, 339 (8802), 1160-1161.

Delwiche, A. (2004). Agenda-setting, opinion leadership, and the world of web logs. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference, New Orleans, LA, May 27-June 1.

Dooley, P. (1999). Journalistic occupational development and discourses of power. In D. Demers & K. Viswanath (Eds.), Mass Media, Social Control and Social Change: A Macrosocial Perspective (pp. 333-357). Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.

Durocher, D. (1998). Strengthening the bond. American Journalism Review, 20 (5), 1-11.

Etzioni, A. (Ed.). (1969). The Semi-Professions and their Organization. New York: Free Press.

Fishman, M. (1982). News and non-events: Making the visible invisible. In J. Ettema & D. Charles Whitney (Eds.), Individuals in Mass Media Organizations: Creativity and Constraint (pp. 219-240). Beverly Hills: Sage.

Flanagin, A., & Metzger, M. (2000). Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77 (3), 515-540.

Fouhy, E. (1997). Pew Center is about listening, not handouts. Retrieved June 6, 2003, from American Society of Newspaper Editors Web site: http://www.asne.org/kiosk/editor/97.jan-feb/fouhy1.htm

Fredin, E. (1997) Rethinking the news story for the Internet: Hyperstory prototypes and a model of the user. Journalism and Mass Communication Monographs, 163.

Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding What's News. New York: Pantheon Books.

Gardner, J. & Oswald, A. (2001). Internet use: the digital divide. In A. Park, J. Curtice, K. Thomson, L. Jarvis, C. Bottomley & N. Stratford (Eds.), British Social Attitudes: the 18th Report: Public Policy, Social Ties (pp. 159-173). London: Sage.

Gaziano, C. (1988). How credible is the credibility crisis? Journalism Quarterly, 65 (2), 267-78.

Gitlin, T. (1977). The televised professional. Social Policy, 8 (3), 94-99.

Habermas, J. 1979. Communication and the Evolution of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.

Hardey, M. (1999). Doctor in the house: The Internet as a source of lay health, knowledge and the challenge to expertise. Sociology of Health and Illness, 21 (6), 820- 835.

Haug, M. R. (1977). Computer technology and the obsolescence of the concept of profession. In M. R. Haug & J. Dofny (Eds.), Work and Technology (pp. 215-228). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Izard (1985). Public confidence in the news media. Journalism Quarterly, 62 (2): 247-55.

Jennings, V. L. (1999). The Plains and the People: A History of Upper Baton Rouge Parish. Gretna, LA: Pelican Publishing Company.

Johnson, T., & Kaye, B. (2002). Webelievability: A path model examining how convenience and reliance predict online credibility. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 79 (3), 619-642.

Kennamer, D., & South, J. (2002). Election coverage reflects civic journalism values. Newspaper Research Journal, 23 (4), 34-45.

Kirtley, J. E. (2003). Bloggers and their First Amendment protection. Nieman Reports, 57 (3), 95-96.

Kritzer, H. M. (1999). The professions are dead, long live the professions: Legal practice in a postprofessional world. Law & Society Review, 33 (3), 713-749.

Kurpius, D. (2002). Sources and civic journalism: Changing patterns of reporting. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 79 (4), 853-866.

Lanson, J. (2000, August 24). It's time to make web an equal partner. Online Journalism Review. Retrieved January 13, 2003 from http://www.ojr.org/ojr/business/1017963559.php

Lasica, J. D. (2002, April 4). The promise of the daily me. Online Journalism Review. Retrieved June 6, 2003 from http://www.ojr.org/ojr/lasica/1017779142.php

Lasica, J. D. (2003a, August 7). What is participatory journalism? Online Journalism Review. Retrieved August 12, 2003 from http://www.ojr.org/ojr/workplace/1060217106.php

Lasica, J. D. (2003b, August 9). Participatory journalism puts the reader in the driver's seat. Online Journalism Review. Retrieved August 12, 2003 from http://www.ojr.org/ojr/workplace/1060218311.php

Lieberman, T. (2001, January/February). Lifting the veil: In a Gilded Age, some are reporting about the less fortunate. Columbia Journalism Review, 39 (5), 57.

Lowrey, W. (2003) What influences small newspapers to decide to publish online news? Newspaper Research Journal, 24 (3), 83-90.

Lowrey, W., & Anderson, W. (in press). Bypassing the middleman: The impact of web use on the public perception of physicians. Health Communication.

Marks, A. (1998). To public, the press too often gets it wrong. Christian Science Monitor, 91 (15), 2.

McAdams, M. (2000). Why news is old news. AJR NewsLink. Retrieved August 12, 2003 from http://newslink.org/mmcol2.html

McQuail, D. (1997). Audience Analysis. London: Sage.

Mills, C. W. (1956). The Power Elite. New York: The Oxford University Press.

MSN. (2004). House & home. Retrieved August 20, 2004 from http://houseandhome.msn.com/pickaplace/comparecities.aspx

Nadarajan, B., & Ang, P. (1999, August). Credibility and journalism on the Internet: How online newspapers handle errors and corrections. Paper presented to the Communication Technology and Policy Division, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, New Orleans, LA.

Newhagen, J. E., & Levy, M. R. (1997). The future of journalism in a distributed communication architecture. In D. L. Borden & K. Harvey (Eds.), The Electronic Grapevine: Rumor, Reputation and Reporting in the New On-line Environment (pp. 9-21). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Nie, N., & Erbring, L. (2000). SIQSS Internet and Society Study. Retrieved June 9, 2003 from http://www.stanford.edu/group/siqss/Press_Release/internetStudy.html

Nielsen, J. (2001, May 13). Search: Visible and simple. Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox. Retrieved June 3, 2003 from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010513.html

Nilson, L., & Edelman, M. (1979, March/April). The symbolic evocation of occupational prestige. Society, 57-64.

Nilson, L. B. (1979). An application of the occupational "uncertainty principle" to the professions. Social Problems, 26 (5), 570-581.

Oppel, R. A. (1997, January/February). Three steps to improve public journalism. The American Editor. Retrieved June 5, 2003 from http://www.asne.org/kiosk/editor/97.jan-feb/oppel1.htm

Outing, S. (2000, October 11). Are days of innovation waning for online news? Editor & Publisher. Retrieved June 4, 2003 from http://www.editorandpublisher.com

Outing, S. (2003, July 31). Blogs have a place on news Web sites: Reporters and readers can contribute. Editor & Publisher. Retrieved August 9, 2003 from http://www.editorandpublisher.com

Park, D. (2004). From many, a few: Intellectual authority and strategic positioning in the coverage of, and self-description of, the "big four" weblogs. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the International Communication Association, New Orleans, LA, May 27-June 1.

Pastore, M. (2001, April 30). Online health consumers more proactive about healthcare. CyberAtlas. Retrieved March 5, 2002 from http://cyberatlas.internet.com/markets/healthcare/article/0,,10101_755471,00.html

Paul, N., & Hansen, K. (2002). Newsroom information practices: Results of a national survey: Implications for news organizations. Paper presented to the Conference on Dynamics of Convergent Media, Columbia, SC, November 7-9.

Peskin, D. (2003). Media, Technology, Society: Executive summary of a report by the Media Center at the American Press Institute. Retrieved May 3, 2005 from http://www.mediacenter.org/05/harvard/MTS-FullwithSummary.pdf

The Pew Research Center. (2000a, June 11). Internet sapping broadcast news audience. Retrieved June 21, 2003 from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=36

The Pew Research Center. (2000b, December 3). Internet election news audience seeks convenience, familiar names. Retrieved May 3, 2005 from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=21

The Pew Research Center. (2002a, June 9). Public news habits little changed by September 11. Retrieved May 3, 2005 from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=156

The Pew Research Center. (2002b, August 4). News media's improved image proves short-lived. Retrieved May 3, 2005 from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=159

The Pew Research Center. (2003, Oct. 21). President's criticism of media resonates, but Iraq unease grows. Retrieved May 3, 2005 from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=195

The Pew Research Center (2004, June 8). News audiences increasingly politicized: Online news audience larger, more diverse. Retrieved May 3, 2005 from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=215

Postman, N. (1985). Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: Viking Press.

Reynolds, G. H. (2003). Weblogs and journalism: Back to the future? Nieman Reports, 57 (3), 81-82.

Rich, C. (1999). Creating Online Media: A Guide to Researching, Writing and Design on the Internet. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Ruggiero, T. E., & Winch, S. P. (2005). The media downing of Pierre Salinger: Journalistic mistrust of the Internet as a news source. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10 (2), article 8. Retrieved April 12, 2005 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue2/ruggiero.html

Schmitz, S. (2000). The effects of electronic commerce on the structure of intermediation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 5 (3). Retrieved April 11, 2005 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol5/issue3/schmitz.html

Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the News: A Social History of American Newspapers. New York: Basic Books.

Schudson, M. (1992). The sociology of news. In J. Curran & M. Gurevitch (Eds.), Mass Media and Society (pp. 41-59). London: Edward Arnold.

Schultz, T. (1999). Interactive options in online journalism: A content analysis of 100 U.S. newspapers. Journal of Computer-Medicated Communication, 5 (1). Retrieved March 6, 2002 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol5/issue1/schultz.html

Schultz, T. (2000). Mass media and the concept of interactivity: An exploratory study of online forums and reader email. Media, Culture and Society, 22 (2), 205-221.

Shapiro, A., & Leone, R. (2000). The Control Revolution: How the Internet is Putting Individuals in Charge and Changing the World We Know. New York: PublicAffairs.

Shoemaker, P., Eichholz, M., Kim, E., & Wrigley, B. (2001). Individual and routine forces in gatekeeping. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78 (2), 233-246.

Simpson, R. L. (1985). Social control of occupations and work. Annual Review of Sociology, 11, 415-436.

Singer, J. (1998). Online journalists: Foundations for research into their changing roles. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4 (1). Retrieved April 12, 2005 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue1/singer.html

Singer, J. (2002). Information trumps interaction in local papers' online caucus coverage. Newspaper Research Journal, 23 (4), 91-96.

Singer, J. (2003a). Campaign contributions: Online newspaper coverage of election 2000. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 80 (1), 39-56.

Singer, J. (2003b). Who are these guys? The online challenge to the notion of journalistic professionalism. Journalism, 4 (2), 139-163.

Singer, J. (2004). The political J-blogger: "Normalizing" a new media form to fit old norms and practices. Paper presented at the Annual convention of the Association of Journalism and Mass Communication Educators, Toronto, Ontario, August 3-7.

Singletary, M. (1982). Commentary: Are journalists professionals? Newspaper Research Journal, 3 (2), 75-87.

Smolkin, R. (June/July 2004). The expanding blogosphere. American Journalism Review, 38-43.

South, J. (1999, June 11). Web staffs urge the print side to think ahead. Online Journalism Review. Retrieved June 23, 2003 from http://www.people.vcu.edu/~jcsouth/resume/clips/ojr0699/web_extras.html

Strupp, J. (2004, September 15). Blessing or curse? Editors examine blogs' role in '60 minutes' uproar. Editor & Publisher. Retrieved September 17, 2004 from http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000629751

Swetnam, L. (1992). Media distortion of the teacher image. Clearing House, 66 (1), 30-33.

Tewksbury, D., & Althaus, S. (2000). Differences in knowledge acquisition among readers of the paper and online versions of a national newspaper. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77 (3), 457-479.

The Civic Engagement Roundtable (1996). Retrieved September 1, 2003 from http://www.iog.ca/publications/cert4.pdf

The Ombudsmen 'movement' - maybe in the 21st Century. (2000). Editor & Publisher, 133 (2), 21-22.

Tuchman, G. (1978). Making the News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. New York: The Free Press.

Van Maanen, J., & Barley, S. R. (1984). Occupational communities: Culture and control in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 287-365.

Weaver, D. H., & Wilhoit, G. C. (1996). The American Journalist in the 1990s: U. S. News People at the End of an Era. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zelizer, B. (1997). Has communication explained journalism? In D. Berkowitz (Ed.), Social Meanings of News: A Text-Reader (pp. 23-30). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications.

About the Authors

Wilson Lowrey is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Journalism at The University of Alabama. His research focuses on the sociology of news work, and on the impact of new technologies on journalism. Lowrey's research has been published in a number of journals, including Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, Gazette, Mass Communication and Society, and Newspaper Research Journal.
Address: Department of Journalism, The University of Alabama, Box 870172, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0172 USA

William Anderson is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Scranton. His research ranges from mass communication history to the sociology of work in mass communication fields. Anderson's research has been published in Public Relations Review, Journalism & Mass Communication Monographs, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, American Journalism, and Newspaper Research Journal.
Address: St. Thomas Hall, Department of Communication, University of Scranton, PA 18510 USA