Abstract
As “boundary objects,” thought-leader articles show some characteristics of journalism but are not considered journalism in its pure sense. Yet this peripheral format occupies a critical place in the media canon and thought-leader articles have value for news organization and audience alike. Given an ongoing demand for content and a declining tendency to pay for it, thought-leader articles have a secure place. But even as they help journalism to overcome one (economic) obstacle, they raise another in the form of questions about their content: Who has a voice? Who is held to account? What agendas are pursued? How are events and topics framed? What are the values of the writer? And who benefits from having a voice, pursuing an agendum and setting the frames of the discussion? When asked of regular reporting, these questions have helped define journalism’s boundaries; when asked of thought-leader articles, the answers similarly reveal what sits inside journalism’s field. This article investigates what thought-leader articles indicate about the boundaries of journalism, through their conformity or otherwise to traditional values and roles.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 324-342 |
Number of pages | 19 |
Journal | Newspaper Research Journal |
Volume | 43 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Sept 2022 |
Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2022 NOND of AEJMC.
ASJC Scopus Subject Areas
- Communication
Keywords
- boundaries
- commentaries
- content analysis
- field theory
- journalism values
- op-eds
- peripheral players