For those of you who have watched me cancel meetings and defer obligations this week, citing an unspecified “media crisis” having to do with my role as Director of the School of Journalism & Mass Communication, wonder no longer. I was involved in defending the work of my colleague and friend, Vilas Distinguished Achievement Professor Lewis Friedland, in trying to uncover the critical information needs of underserved localities and social groups. Today Lew published a superb analysis of the situation in the Washington Post:
Sometimes research takes on a life of its own and becomes more like a Rorschach test for a national policy controversy. That’s what’s happened to a review of the literature on the critical information needs of American communities that I and colleagues from around the country conducted for the Federal Communications Commission in July 2012. The recommendations of the review informed a proposed pilot study in Columbia, S.C., of what, if any, critical information needs citizens have and whether they are being met in our rapidly changing media environment.
To conservative media from Fox News to Rush Limbaugh, this was an attempt to reintroduce the now-lapsed Fairness Doctrine and for President Obama to take control of America’s newsrooms. Other former journalists and media critics apparently agreed. Still others took a more nuanced view – that this may not have been a government plot, but that it would be a waste of money, because either we already know what these needs are, or, there aren’t any, or if there are, we can’t know what they are.
In the end, the underlying theme was: we already know the answers. Americans either have no needs or none that the market is not meeting or can’t meet. Don’t do research. Don’t ask these questions.
Click over to our department weblog Mediated Communication to read the rest of Lew’s important essay. It’s well worth your time.