Journalism history : a debate

Mark HAMPTON, Martin CONBOY

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)Researchpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this exchange, Mark Hampton and Martin Conboy debate the best approaches to researching and writing journalism history. In the first essay, Hampton, taking as his starting point Conboy's 2010 agenda-setting article, "The Paradoxes of Journalism History'', argues that journalism history should be more deeply integrated within broader cultural, political, and economic historiographies, and that media history is key to this task. In the second essay, Conboy acknowledges the importance of such wider contexts, but reaffirms the need for disentangling journalism history more carefully from media history in order to appreciate its distinctive qualities. This methodological disagreement is particularly important because of the underlying premise on which both scholars agree: that a rigorous historical approach is central to the undertaking of Journalism Studies.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)154-171
Number of pages18
JournalJournalism Studies
Volume15
Issue number2
Early online date1 Aug 2013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

journalism
History
history
historiography
Economics
economics

Keywords

  • historical methodology
  • journalism as discourse
  • journalism history
  • media history
  • political economy of news

Cite this

HAMPTON, Mark ; CONBOY, Martin. / Journalism history : a debate. In: Journalism Studies. 2014 ; Vol. 15, No. 2. pp. 154-171.
@article{cbfd33ffc8b84cf0953acad0f9af8778,
title = "Journalism history : a debate",
abstract = "In this exchange, Mark Hampton and Martin Conboy debate the best approaches to researching and writing journalism history. In the first essay, Hampton, taking as his starting point Conboy's 2010 agenda-setting article, {"}The Paradoxes of Journalism History'', argues that journalism history should be more deeply integrated within broader cultural, political, and economic historiographies, and that media history is key to this task. In the second essay, Conboy acknowledges the importance of such wider contexts, but reaffirms the need for disentangling journalism history more carefully from media history in order to appreciate its distinctive qualities. This methodological disagreement is particularly important because of the underlying premise on which both scholars agree: that a rigorous historical approach is central to the undertaking of Journalism Studies.",
keywords = "historical methodology, journalism as discourse, journalism history, media history, political economy of news",
author = "Mark HAMPTON and Martin CONBOY",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1080/1461670X.2013.816547",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "154--171",
journal = "Journalism Studies",
issn = "1461-670X",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

Journalism history : a debate. / HAMPTON, Mark; CONBOY, Martin.

In: Journalism Studies, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2014, p. 154-171.

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)Researchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Journalism history : a debate

AU - HAMPTON, Mark

AU - CONBOY, Martin

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - In this exchange, Mark Hampton and Martin Conboy debate the best approaches to researching and writing journalism history. In the first essay, Hampton, taking as his starting point Conboy's 2010 agenda-setting article, "The Paradoxes of Journalism History'', argues that journalism history should be more deeply integrated within broader cultural, political, and economic historiographies, and that media history is key to this task. In the second essay, Conboy acknowledges the importance of such wider contexts, but reaffirms the need for disentangling journalism history more carefully from media history in order to appreciate its distinctive qualities. This methodological disagreement is particularly important because of the underlying premise on which both scholars agree: that a rigorous historical approach is central to the undertaking of Journalism Studies.

AB - In this exchange, Mark Hampton and Martin Conboy debate the best approaches to researching and writing journalism history. In the first essay, Hampton, taking as his starting point Conboy's 2010 agenda-setting article, "The Paradoxes of Journalism History'', argues that journalism history should be more deeply integrated within broader cultural, political, and economic historiographies, and that media history is key to this task. In the second essay, Conboy acknowledges the importance of such wider contexts, but reaffirms the need for disentangling journalism history more carefully from media history in order to appreciate its distinctive qualities. This methodological disagreement is particularly important because of the underlying premise on which both scholars agree: that a rigorous historical approach is central to the undertaking of Journalism Studies.

KW - historical methodology

KW - journalism as discourse

KW - journalism history

KW - media history

KW - political economy of news

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/2309

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84895905072&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/1461670X.2013.816547

DO - 10.1080/1461670X.2013.816547

M3 - Journal Article (refereed)

VL - 15

SP - 154

EP - 171

JO - Journalism Studies

JF - Journalism Studies

SN - 1461-670X

IS - 2

ER -