This article critically examines the use of elite interviews in media and communications policy research. It addresses the fit between various analytical frameworks and elite interviews as a primary source of data, interviewee selection, access, the conduct of interviews and data analysis. It is argued that there is a lack of methodological explanation and reflection in our field of study. Partly, this is determined by the preferences of publishers and space constrains but also a widespread reluctance to engage with methodological issues. This contributes to the diminishing relevance of large amounts of scholarship for policy-makers who tend to privilege studies based on narrowly defined and soundly elaborated empirical methods. Clear and concise methodological rigour, systematization and ethnographic reflexivity, thus, play an incredibly important role.
Communication in policymaking and regulation has been of interest to political scientists for the last fifteen years. Lamentably, the conceptualization and analysis of communication in media policymaking and regulation has yet to garner much attention by media policy scholars. Drawing on theories of power and new institutionalism, we address this paucity by introducing a theoretical and methodological approach that centers on the intersection of communication and power in media policymaking. Such a framework is particularly required for media policy studies, since media companies not only represent the regulated parties, but also control the avenues of policy communication. This tremendous amount of power raises normative concerns for bias, silence and capture of the policymaking agenda.
This article addresses the knowledge gap regarding small market newspapers in the United States. We address a deceptively simple research question: what is the state of small market newspapers in the United States as seen through the eyes of practitioners and industry experts? Based on in-depth interviews with experts and practitioners, we argue for a more nuanced vocabulary to describe newspapers and local news. Grouping all newspapers into a monolithic industry – as general sector analyses often do – suggests a homogeneous experience. That is not the case. Smaller publications face their own challenges and opportunities, and they define success and innovation on their own terms. This reality needs to be better understood.
Chapters 2 through 5 house the case studies for the book. Each chapter is sub-divided by country to give the reader a detailed understanding of the dynamics at play. Chapter 2 assesses the structural regulation of local television by focusing on a key issue in the debate over local television. It thus considers the FCC’s quadrennial ownership reviews in the United States, the fee-for-carriage debate in Canada, and Ofcom’s reviews of public service broadcasting in the United Kingdom. This chapter also introduces two key terms: public good and market failure. The chapter demonstrates how the local is bound so tightly to commercial markets, broadcasting technologies and the status quo that alternatives views are effective erased.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.