Journalism Practice (Journalism Pract)

Publisher: Taylor & Francis (Routledge)

Journal description

Journalism Practice is a new scholarly, international and multidisciplinary journal, published three times a year by Routledge, Taylor & Francis, which provides opportunities for reflective, critical and research-based studies focused on the professional practice of journalism. The emphasis on journalism practice does not imply any false or intellectually disabling disconnect between theory and practice, but simply an assertion that Journalism Practice's primary concern will be to analyse and explore issues of practice and professional relevance. Journalism Practice is an intellectually rigorous journal with all contributions being refereed anonymously by acknowledged international experts in the field. An intellectually lively, but professionally experienced, Editorial Board with a wide-ranging experience of journalism practice advises and supports the Editor. Journalism Practice is devoted to: the study and analysis of significant issues arising from journalism as a field of professional practice; relevant developments in journalism training and education, as well as the construction of a reflective curriculum for journalism; analysis of journalism practice across the distinctive but converging media platforms of magazines, newspapers, online, radio and television; and the provision of a public space for practice-led, scholarly contributions from journalists as well as academics. Journalism Practice's ambitious scope includes the history of journalism practice; the professional practice of journalism; journalism training and education; journalism practice and new technology; journalism practice and ethics; and journalism practice and policy. It is hoped that Journalism Practice will complement current trends to expansion in the teaching and analysis of journalism practice within the academy, reflection on the emergence of a reflective curriculum and thereby help to consolidate journalism as an intellectual discipline within the landscape of higher education.

Current impact factor: 0.00

Impact Factor Rankings

Additional details

5-year impact 0.00
Cited half-life 0.00
Immediacy index 0.00
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.00
Website Journalism Practice website
Other titles Journalism practice (Online)
ISSN 1751-2786
OCLC 85771418
Material type Document, Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

Taylor & Francis (Routledge)

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Some individual journals may have policies prohibiting pre-print archiving
    • On author's personal website or departmental website immediately
    • On institutional repository or subject-based repository after a 18 months embargo
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • On a non-profit server
    • Published source must be acknowledged
    • Must link to publisher version
    • Set statements to accompany deposits (see policy)
    • The publisher will deposit in on behalf of authors to a designated institutional repository including PubMed Central, where a deposit agreement exists with the repository
    • SSH: Social Science and Humanities
    • Publisher last contacted on 25/03/2014
    • This policy is an exception to the default policies of 'Taylor & Francis (Routledge)'
  • Classification
    ​ green

Publications in this journal

  • Journalism Practice 08/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1054416
  • Journalism Practice 08/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1068130
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article explores how nine Swedish cultural editors and managers in mainstream media institutions define cultural journalism and its political dimensions during times of increased digitization and media convergence. Swedish cultural journalism is aesthetic and political critique applied to subject areas (music, literature, etc.) and contemporary societal and ethical issues. Drawing on Zelizer we ask whether there is a common interpretive community of cultural journalists in different media regarding: (1) how they define their scope, (2) how they understand “the political” in cultural journalism and its implications for democracy, and (3) how they view media convergence and digitalization. We find that although editors/managers from different media share a basic understanding of cultural journalism as an alternative perspective to news, “the political” in cultural journalism is approached differently in the press and the public service broadcast media. Furthermore, due in part to structural conditions, they also see the effects of digitization differently, forming sub-communities on two counts. This study thus contributes new knowledge to a field previously focused almost exclusively on newspapers.
    Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1051358
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1052214
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1051373
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1051370
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1051357
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1051361
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1063080
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1058180
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1051371
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1058179
  • Journalism Practice 07/2015; 9(4):614-616. DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1036567
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this paper is to explicate two competing journalistic paradigms in China in the pre-reform era. The time frame is from the establishment of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949 to the launching of the reform and open policy in 1978. A common view is that during that period the Chinese government, under the leadership of Chairman Mao, adopted the Soviet press model, in which media were tightly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and journalism was overwhelmingly dominated by the principles of a party press. In this paper, however, I argue that two journalistic paradigms operated simultaneously during that period: while the CCP and the government tried to impose the principle of statesman-run-newspapers, some journalists tried to maintain a tradition of intellectual-run-newspapers. The differences between the two paradigms regarding the role of the media, journalistic identity, levels of autonomy, narrative style, historical origin and others are discussed. The paper concludes that although intellectual-run-newspapers faced severe crackdowns, the inspirational force of the paradigm never became extinct. More importantly, it has been a continued influence on critical-minded journalists in China today.
    Journalism Practice 06/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1040052
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article discusses the role of the online audience community as a strategic resource for media work. It opens up a current perspective on the audience community, which has received scarce attention in research both conceptually and empirically. The article provides an empirical analysis of the various ways in which the audience community can serve as a resource in the work of journalists. The conclusion is that the audience community can have wide-ranging strategic significance and implications for media work and media brands. In particular, observing and connecting with the audience community can help journalists acquire deeper knowledge and understanding of the audience, as well as strengthen commitment and engagement among the audience with the media brand. As a consequence of collaborating with the audience community, new journalistic roles and tasks are emerging.
    Journalism Practice 06/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1036903
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: By analyzing all of the keywords and hashtags that became Trending Topics (TTs) in the Italian Twittersphere during both an electoral period and a non-electoral period, we evaluated what Italian Twitter users discussed. We found that topics about actors and issues in the entertainment field (e.g., singers, Hollywood stars and television stars) drive Italian discussions and that the political sphere is a secondary topic that elicits minor arguments within users’ conversations. However, we believe that even this low level of discussion about politics was able to influence the public agenda, thanks to the advent of a hybrid media system in Italy. In fact, Italian print media and television constantly covered the individual tweets or hashtags of a niche of citizens who were discussing politics on Twitter. Television, a part of the Italian media system that is highly consumed by the public, is also a primary factor in determining the appearance of a specific actor or issue on the TT list. Furthermore, we empirically confirmed the logic of breaking news events on Twitter, a microblogging site that primarily focuses on exceptional occurrences.
    Journalism Practice 06/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1040051
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The paper is based on an empirical study recently conducted in Italy through the photo-elicitation technique, involving 120 young Italians and focusing on two groups of individuals—an experimental and a control group. The two groups were shown images related to global crisis events. The first was told which photos were taken by professionals, which by citizens and which by other people involved in the events (soldiers, victims, perpetrators, etc.), while the second group was not provided with this information. Both groups were asked a battery of questions regarding the themes of trust, value, impact, use and circulation/distribution of the photographs shown, allowing the interviewees to define these concepts in the face of individual images. The principal results indicate that trust in news photographs is inseparable from impact and value for the development of a sense of active citizenship. Trust is revised in light of the awareness that there exists a variety of possible publics, active and passive, with different possibilities of affecting events through their actions. The distinction between citizen and professional photographs does not in itself lead to distinctions in terms of value and trust. Knowing the photographer’s role in the event being depicted redefines the terms of the discourse and shifts the moral borderlines that the publics draw between different images and different media for their distribution. Introducing the ethnographic approach, the present study proposes going beyond studies that concentrate only on effects as well as those focused on trust, which prescribe a distinction between citizen and professional photojournalism.
    Journalism Practice 04/2015; DOI:10.1080/17512786.2015.1030141