Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHeflin, Kristen Marie
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-04T18:59:12Z
dc.date.available2014-03-04T18:59:12Z
dc.date.issued2010-12
dc.identifier.otherheflin_kristen_m_201012_phd
dc.identifier.urihttp://purl.galileo.usg.edu/uga_etd/heflin_kristen_m_201012_phd
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10724/26910
dc.description.abstractJournalism is currently experiencing a severe crisis of credibility, and the Internet is often celebrated as a response to this crisis. Drawing from a historical-cultural analysis, this dissertation begins by historicizing the crisis of credibility in journalism and the development of the Internet as a decentralized network to provide the context necessary to better understand the expectations, practices and issues related to online information and the crisis of credibility. It then discusses the Internet’s inability to serve as the solution to this crisis as being rooted in the contradiction between deliberation and verification, two values at the heart of journalistic practice, liberal democratic media theory and ultimately Western epistemology. Through analyses of popular and trade press evaluations of Wikipedia and Twitter this dissertation discusses the irreconcilable nature of these values and the ways journalists try, unsuccessfully, to reconcile these two values. Despite its promise, the Internet is not the solution to this crisis of credibility because online sources (such as Wikipedia) and non-professional contributions (such as those on Twitter) have been largely accommodated within traditional journalistic routines, professional norms and reigning conceptions of producing authoritative knowledge. Thus, journalists’ use of Wikipedia and Twitter perpetuate the contradictions at the heart of journalism practice and traditional Western epistemology, which are the same instabilities that produce the present crisis in credibility. As such, this dissertation reveals that the crisis of credibility is not a technological one, but a cultural one about the inadequacy of liberal democratic media theory. The study concludes with a discussion of the inadequacies of liberal democratic media theory and an argument for the utility of a cultural historical approach.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisheruga
dc.rightspublic
dc.subjectjournalism
dc.subjectTwitter
dc.subjectWikipedia
dc.subjectcrisis of credibility
dc.subjectInternet
dc.subjectARPANET
dc.subjectliberal democratic media theory
dc.titleIn Twitter and Wikipedia we trust?
dc.title.alternativeonline information and the crisis of credibility
dc.typeDissertation
dc.description.degreePhD
dc.description.departmentGrady College of Journalism and Mass Communication
dc.description.majorMass Communication
dc.description.advisorJames F. Hamilton
dc.description.committeeJames F. Hamilton
dc.description.committeePatricia Richards
dc.description.committeeHorace Newcomb
dc.description.committeeJanice Hume
dc.description.committeeCarolina Acosta-Alzuru


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record