Content uploaded by Deborah S. Chung
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Deborah S. Chung on Mar 09, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 28:271–288, 2013
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0890-0523 print/1532-7728 online
DOI: 10.1080/08900523.2013.826987
Media Credibility and Journalistic Role
Conceptions: Views on Citizen and Professional
Journalists among Citizen Contributors
Deborah S. Chung
School of Journalism and Telecommunications
University of Kentucky
Seungahn Nah
Department of Community and Leadership Development
University of Kentucky
This study identifies citizen journalists’ role conceptions regarding their news contributing activities
and their perceptions of professional journalists’ roles. Specifically, the ethical criterion of media
credibility was assessed to identify predictors on their perceptions of roles. Analyses reveal citizen
journalists perceive their roles to be generally similar to professional journalists and even rated
certain roles more prominently for themselves. Further, their perceptions of media credibility were
found to function as a core belief in how they assessed their roles and also those of professional
journalists, which has implications for a system of open ethics.
Ordinary citizens are increasingly able to act as independent agents in the production of news
with the help of various interactive, participatory tools. This activity in which citizens contribute
content as informational sources is broadly known as citizen journalism (Bowman & Willis,
2003; Nah, 2008). Interactive communication technologies have facilitated the participation of
news audiences into the very process of content creation. Such practices of linking to and
commenting on online resources are a radically different form of news discourse than that of
the traditional media (Haas, 2005).
As citizens increasingly participate in news production, however, many have become con-
cerned with the credibility of news stories (e.g., Kramer, 2004; Lasica, 2003), pointing to
This project was supported by the University of Kentucky, College of Communication and Information, College
Research Activities Award.
Correspondence should be sent to Deborah S. Chung, PhD, 215 Grehan Building, School of Journalism and
Telecommunications, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506-0042. E-mail: dchung@uky.edu
271
272 CHUNG AND NAH
problems that detached, objective observations have become increasingly meshed with personal
perspectives. The credibility of information perceived to be attained through objective reporting
practices is critical to professional journalism. Objectivity has gradually become associated with
facts/knowledge and is articulated as an ethical principle in American journalism. The doctrine
of objectivity creates a normative distinction between journalists and external forces (Ward &
Wasserman, 2010). As ordinary citizens lack the training in interviewing, observation, fact-
checking and sourcing practices—what media critics call a strategic ritual (Tuchman, 1972)—
media professionals have expressed concern over the dissemination of inaccurate information.
The literature in this area, however, points to newsrooms’ increased efforts to incorporate
citizen content into their daily presentation of news (Cleary & Bloom, 2011), seemingly moving
toward an understanding of pragmatic objectivity (Ward, 2010) that avoids strict distinctions
between news and opinion as is more appropriate for the present media climate of social and
participatory media. Citizen journalists in particular may also consider themselves to function
similarly to their professional counterparts and share basic traditional practices of objective
reporting. Thus, it is critical to examine how they actually identify with the notion of media
credibility and participate in the collective responsibility of information communication. Citizen
journalists may also have different agendas for news production than professional journalists;
it seems appropriate to examine their role conceptions—referred to as the “core belief system”
of journalists (Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996, p. 137).
This study aims to identify how citizen journalists see their roles and how their views differ
or are similar to their views of professional journalists’ roles. Specifically, this study examines
how perceived media credibility influences these role conceptions.
JOURNALISTS’ ROLE CONCEPTIONS
Since Lippmann (1925) and Dewey’s (1927) debate about citizen participation and the condi-
tions of the public sphere in a democratic society, the question about journalists’ roles in society
has been an on-going topic of discussion. While Lippman suggested citizen elites to represent
the public and govern in the citizens’ name, Dewey believed in citizens’ active participation
in identifying and discussing relevant social issues. He insisted that citizens have a claim to
political discussions that have consequences on their lives and that interpersonal communication
stabilizes the public spheres. Dewey believed the press served a facilitating/mediating function
rather than merely a transmitter or interpreter of information role. This division was essentially
a debate between opinion and fact, values from science, and interpretation versus objectivity.
Such views were also supported by Cohen (1963) and Johnstone, Slawski, and Bowman
(1976) as they distinguished two clusters of role types: neutral, or impartial informer, and
participants, or active agents of information communication. Evidence initially pointed to jour-
nalists’ preference for the neutral role, which is closely tied to the idea of objectivity as a core
professional value (Janowitz, 1975; Johnstone et al., 1976; Schudson, 1978; Tuchman, 1978).
However, research examining how journalists view their functions in American society
has documented both stable and evolving conceptions of journalists’ roles over the last four
decades (e.g., Johnstone et al., 1976; Weaver & Wilhoit, 1986, 1996; Weaver et al., 2007).
Starting in the 1980s, Weaver and Wilhoit (1986) continued Johnstone et al.’s (1976) research
identifying American journalists’ perceptions of their professional roles, and in their first survey
MEDIA CREDIBILITY AND JOURNALISTIC ROLE CONCEPTIONS 273
discovered three role conceptions—interpretive, disseminator, and adversarial. The following
decade they identified four role types (Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996)—interpretive/investigative
(e.g., investigating government claims), disseminator (e.g., getting information to the public
quickly), adversarial (e.g., being an adversary of government and businesses), and populist
mobilizer (e.g., letting people express views and motivating people to get involved).
In their most recent survey Weaver and his colleagues (2007) identified the same four roles
among American professional journalists but found significant changes in journalists’ views on
their roles. While the interpretive role was still perceived to be the strongest, a steep decline was
found for the disseminator role and a marked increase in the populist mobilizer role (Weaver
et al., 2007).
DIVERSIFYING ROLE CONCEPTIONS
Some research documents differences in perceived role conceptions based on evolving work
venue and professional activities. For example, Cassidy (2005) discovered print newspaper
journalists to perceive the interpretive/investigative functions as significantly more important
than online journalists. Beam, Weaver, and Brownlee (2009) found journalists who blogged
were significantly more likely to believe a) journalists should point people toward solutions
to society’s problems and b) journalists should help set the political agenda than journalists
who did not. These findings are noteworthy as these two items are associated with the populist
mobilizer function—a relatively newer role.
While traditional roles exist, the evolving nature of perceived role conceptions suggests
journalism values, ethics and practices are also changing perhaps in response to a public that
welcomes and is accustomed to immediate information, transparent conversation and insightful
interpretation: much less in demand is editorial control and the process of verification (Friend &
Singer, 2007; Singer, 2010; Ward, 2010). Changes in contemporary society challenge traditional
normative media functions (Christians et al., 2009).
However, perceptions about media professionals’ roles have generally been asked to jour-
nalists exclusively and rarely to the news audience, including citizen journalists. While media
roles are considered normative, much of American journalism focuses on a closed ethics
system limiting participation by nonmembers of the profession (Ward & Wasserman, 2010). Yet
these questions are critical for news audiences. Establishing a connection can in turn increase
audiences’ interest in news and civic life (Heider, McCombs, & Poindexter, 2005). A system of
open ethics may allow nonmembers of the core profession to meaningfully contribute to changes
to content (Ward & Wasserman, 2010). In their investigation of news audiences’ perceptions
of journalistic roles, Heider et al. (2005) found audiences do not endorse traditional media
roles but rather are more likely to find civic journalism as an extremely important function of
the news media. New media and new participants considerably challenge traditional notions of
media ethics.
Research also documents news professionals are becoming more aware of the role of citizen
journalists. In a study targeting community newspaper editors, Nah and Chung (2009) found
the perceived roles of professional journalists are positively correlated with their perceived roles
of citizen journalists. However, community newspaper editors rate all professional journalists’
roles significantly higher than those of citizen journalists’ roles.
274 CHUNG AND NAH
MEDIA CREDIBILITY
While media credibility is but a small portion of the extensive discussion on media ethics, it is
closely tied to the ideas of objectivity and the pursuit of truth, which is a foundational value
of American journalism. This concept is further associated with the issue of how information
becomes knowledge (Burbules, 2001). The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) maintains a
Code of Ethics underscoring the importance of journalists’ credibility in performing their duties
to seek truth and ensure the public’s right to know (see http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp).
Thus, credibility is reported to continually function as an important variable in the contemporary
media climate.
As the process and platforms in which news is presented, delivered and shared are transform-
ing, researchers have examined perceived credibility of those various outlets, including online
news sites of offline media versus sites based solely online (Kim & Johnson, 2009), blogs
(Johnson & Kaye, 2004), wikis (Flanagin & Metzger, 2011), and other forms of user-generated
content (Johnson & Kaye, 2009). Such studies question the diverging journalistic practices
present on diversifying media platforms and audiences responses toward consuming information
through nontraditional, or non-authoritative, sources. While earlier studies report newspapers
and television were considered the most credible sources of news (Abel & Wirth, 1977; Metzger
& Flanagin, 2000; Gaziano & McGrath, 1986), more recent studies point to a shift in views.
For example, Johnson and Kaye (2004) found blog users to attribute higher credibility to blogs
than traditional media sources while also rating traditional sources as moderately credible. Kim
and Johnson (2009) found independent online newspapers were considered most credible for
political information over traditional news media and their online sites. Johnson and Kaye
(2009) found blogs to be perceived with the most credibility followed by issue-oriented sites.
As citizen journalism activities have garnered attention by the media, research assessing
citizen submissions has also attracted scholarly attention. Miller and Kurpius (2010) found
both official and citizen sources were viewed as credible by television viewers although they
ascribed significantly higher credibility to official sources. Flanagin and Metzger (2011) found
both children and adults assess online information to be more credible when it is seemingly
based from Encyclopædia Britannica rather than the popularly used Wikipedia. While some
studies found citizen sources to be perceived as less credible than official or elite sources,
Carpenter (2010) found online citizen journalism articles were more likely to incorporate diverse
topical stories, links to external sources and interactive/multimedia functions and features and,
thus, making a contribution to the marketplace of information.
Perceptions on media credibility are also found to be associated with certain user attitudes
and behaviors. Perceived media credibility was found to be a predictive variable in how
audiences choose to “interact” with online news sites, with individuals ascribing higher levels
of news credibility more likely to engage in various types of interactive features—particularly
those facilitating personal expression and interpersonal communication online (Chung & Nah,
2009). Furthermore, in a study of online community newspaper audiences, Nah and Chung
(2012) also found media credibility to be positively related to the role conceptions of profes-
sional journalists while social trust was positively associated with both professional and citizen
journalists’ role conceptions.
Such growth of various informational sources online and the increased consumption of
these sources that allow for audience participation may, thus, also impact news audiences—in
MEDIA CREDIBILITY AND JOURNALISTIC ROLE CONCEPTIONS 275
particular those who actively participate as new informational sources (i.e., citizen journalists).
These individuals may have developed new-found roles as professional journalists no longer act
as the sole gatekeepers of information (Cassidy, 2007). This evolution within the news industry
may subsequently affect the relationship between perceived media credibility and how citizen
journalists, for example, view the roles of both professional and citizen journalists. Journalistic
roles, or functions, should work toward the public good in a normative sense by encouraging
ordinary citizens to engage meaningfully in democratic decision-making processes. In doing so,
journalists should maintain integrity in their ethical practices, which are “::: the cornerstone of
a journalists’ credibility” (see http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp). While credibility has been a
major construct examined in the communication discipline, its association to citizen journalists,
a growing population, and in particular their role conceptions, has not often been examined.
The following research questions thus arise:
RQ1: What are citizen journalists’ perceived role conceptions of citizen and professional
journalists? In other words, to what extent are citizen journalists’ perceived role
conceptions of professional journalists different or similar to the perceived roles of
citizen journalists?
RQ2: To what extent does citizen journalists’ perceived media credibility (from both the
mainstream and citizen media levels) predict the perceived journalistic role concep-
tions of professional and citizen journalists?
METHOD
Study Population
As there is no single complete list of citizen journalists, the Knight Community News Network’s
(KCNN) list of community and citizen media sites was used as the first reference. The news
media sites listed are created by multiple community members or individual citizens who
participated in contributing content primarily in the form of stories and videos. While there are
various definitions of citizen journalists, Friedland and Kim (2009) and Nah (2008) in particular
have conceptualized citizen journalism as motivating citizens to participate in democratic
conversations—regardless of quality of those communications. This definition aims to focus on
citizen deliberations and idea exchange and finds meaning in the very act of participation itself.
This study adopts this conceptualization of citizen journalism, and this definition corresponds
to the list of community and citizen news sites compiled on the KCNN site.
A Google search was also conducted using the keywords “citizen journalism sites,” which
generated four additional sources.1Finally, citizen journalists who contributed journalistic
content to the top 100 newspapers in the United States were recruited.2
With these sources, steps were taken to first visit all citizen news media sites on the KCNN’s
list, excluding any sites that were news aggregators or sites that were not functioning. Then
the sites identified through the Google search were visited. Once all working sources were
compiled, e-mail addresses of those citizens who contributed content to these news media
sites were identified. A final list of 408 sites was compiled3in which 556 individual e-mail
addresses of citizens who contributed journalistic content were identified. Also, 181 general
276 CHUNG AND NAH
e-mail addresses, 73 contact form pages to community news media sites, and 100 contact
e-mail addresses to the editors of the top 100 newspapers in the United States were compiled.4
Although not a random or representative sample, this semi-purposive approach was considered
appropriate for this project (see Nah, Veenstra, & Shah, 2006). Further, because little is
known about the perceptions and characteristics of those individuals who contribute journalistic
content, this was considered a pressing step in the present research project. As a result, a total
of 215 individuals participated in the survey yielding an initial response rate of roughly 23.6%.5
After excluding cases with considerably limited completed values (e.g., less than half completed
or did not complete the questions on role conceptions), the study yielded a final sample of
130, or a final completion rate of 14.3%. While low, this is similar to those reported in other
web surveys (Couper, 2000; Porter & Whitcomb, 2003).
Data Collection
Data were collected through an online survey using Qualtrics. An electronic invitation to
participate was sent weekly, and the survey was kept active for five weeks. The survey
consisted of a self-administered questionnaire that asked respondents their news contributing
activities, frequency of contributions, perceptions regarding citizen journalists’ and professional
journalists’ roles in their local communities, perceived media credibility of mainstream and
citizen media and questions related to demographic characteristics.
Measures
Dependent variables: Citizen and professional journalists’ role conceptions. Weaver
et al.’s (2007) most recent survey battery of 15 questions was used to measure both citizen
and professional journalists’ role conceptions. The response scale ranged from “not really
important” (1) to “extremely important” (7). Items measuring the four prevalent roles identified
in the literature—disseminator, interpreter, adversary and populist mobilizer—along with the
civic role, were conceptually grouped.
Disseminator: The disseminator role for both citizen and professional journalists was mea-
sured by asking respondents to rate the importance of two items: a) getting information to
the public quickly, and b) staying away from stories where factual content cannot be verified.
Two indices (i.e., disseminator citizen journalist, DCJ, and disseminator professional journalist,
DPJ) were then created by summing and then averaging the two items (MD5.05, sd D1.54,
Inter-item correlation D.31/Cronbach’s alpha D.43 for CJ; MD5.79, sd D1.22, Inter-item
correlation D.28/Cronbach’s alpha D.42 for PJ).
Interpreter: The interpreter role for both citizen and professional journalists was measured by
asking respondents to rate the importance of four items: a) providing analysis and interpretation
of international developments, b) providing analysis and interpretation of complex problems,
c) investigating claims and statements made by the government, and d) discussing national
policy while it is still being developed. Two indices (i.e., interpreter citizen journalist, ICJ, and
interpreter professional journalist, IPJ) were then constructed by summing and then averaging
the four items (MD5.01, sd D1.50, Cronbach’s alpha D.86 for CJ; MD5.99, sd D1.08,
Cronbach’s alpha D.82 for PJ).
MEDIA CREDIBILITY AND JOURNALISTIC ROLE CONCEPTIONS 277
Adversary: The adversary role for both citizen and professional journalists was measured
by asking respondents to rate the importance of two items: a) being an adversary of businesses
by being constantly skeptical of their actions, and b) being an adversary of public officials by
being constantly skeptical of their actions. Two indices (i.e., adversary citizen journalist, ACJ,
and adversary professional journalist, APJ) were then created by summing and then averaging
the two items (MD5.13, sd D1.66, Inter-item correlation D.85/Cronbach’s alpha D.91 for
CJ; MD5.01, sd D1.65, Inter-item correlation D.82/Cronbach’s alpha D.93 for PJ).
Populist Mobilizer (or just Mobilizer): The populist moblizer role for both citizen and
professional journalists was measured by asking respondents to rate the importance of five
items: a) developing intellectual and cultural interests of the public, b) setting the political
agenda, c) giving ordinary people a chance to express their views on public affairs, d) motivating
ordinary people to get involved in public discussions of important issues, and e) pointing people
toward possible solutions to society’s problems. Two indices (i.e., mobilizer citizen journalist,
MCJ, and mobilizer professional journalist, MPJ) were then created by summing and then
averaging the two items (MD5.47, sd D1.01, Cronbach’s alpha D.67 for CJ; MD4.34,
sd D1.13, Cronbach’s alpha D.64 for PJ).
Civic role: Four questions assessing perceptions of civic journalism values were also included
(Weaver et al., 2007). The response scale was the same as that of the above four role conception
questions. The civic role for both citizen and professional journalists was measured by asking
respondents to rate the importance of: a) conducting polls to learn citizens’ priorities on issues,
b) convening meetings of citizens and community leaders to discuss public issues, c) making
special efforts to motivate citizens to participate in decision making on public issues, and
d) making special efforts to include ordinary citizens as sources in public affairs stories.
Following the same procedures as the above variables, two indices (i.e., civic citizen journalist,
CCJ, and civic professional journalist, CPJ) were then created (MD4.77, sd D1.44, Cronbach’s
alpha D.76 for CJ; MD4.46, sd D1.52, Cronbach’s alpha D.77 for PJ). Table 1 illustrates
the five role conceptions of both professional and citizen journalists: disseminator, interpreter,
adversary, moblizer, and civic roles.
Independent variables: Perceived media credibility. In measuring media credibility, we
asked the respondents how much they agreed that national, mainstream news media (i.e., The
New York Times, USA Today) and citizen news media (i.e., citizen organization sponsored sites)
provide fair, accurate, believable, and comprehensive information (Cassidy, 2007; Gaziano &
McGrath, 1986, Johnson & Kaye, 1998, 2000, 2002; Newhagen & Mass, 1989). The four items
were measured using a seven-point scale (1 Dstrongly disagree and 7 Dstrongly agree). Then,
two measures of media credibility were constructed by taking the mean score of each of the
four items (MD5.13, sd D1.36, Cronbach’s alpha D.91 for national, mainstream news
media; MD4.30, sd D1.24, Cronbach’s alpha D.86 for citizen-based news media).
Control variables: Individual and journalistic experience. We controlled for the fol-
lowing variables in our analysis—gender, age, education, income, ideology, and experience as
a citizen journalist. For ideology, we asked about ideological positions on social and economic
issues. The response scale ranged from “very liberal” (1) to “very conservative” (7). The
response items were reverse coded and then the mean score was calculated (MD5.41; sd D
278 CHUNG AND NAH
TABLE 1
Descriptives for Role Conceptions
Professional
Journalists
Citizen
Journalists
Roles Mean (sd) Mean (sd)
Disseminator 5.79 (1.22) 5.05 (1.54)
Get information to the public quickly 5.89 (1.42) 5.50 (1.78)
Stay away from stories where factual content cannot be verified 5.67 (1.64) 4.67 (1.93)
Inter-item Correlation/Cronbach’s Alpha .28/.42 .31/.43
Interpreter 5.99 (1.08) 5.01 (1.50)
Provide analysis and interpretation of complex problems 5.74 (1.45) 5.00 (1.68)
Investigate claims and statements made by the government 6.35 (1.29) 5.57 (1.73)
Provide analysis and interpretation of international developments 6.08 (1.25) 4.34 (1.89)
Discuss national policy while it is still being developed 5.78 (1.39) 5.23 (1.86)
Cronbach’s Alpha .82 .86
Adversary 5.01 (1.65) 5.13 (1.66)
Be an adversary of public officials by being constantly skeptical of their actions 5.00 (1.76) 5.20 (1.70)
Be an adversary of business by being constantly skeptical of their actions 4.99 (1.69) 5.06 (1.76)
Inter-item Correlation/Cronbach’s Alpha .82/.93 .85/.91
Mobilizer 4.34 (1.13) 5.47 (1.01)
Develop intellectual and cultural interest of the public 4.76 (1.77) 5.19 (1.69)
Set the political agenda 3.10 (1.93) 3.78 (1.99)
Give ordinary people a chance to express their views on public affairs 4.24 (1.88) 6.27 (1.21)
Motivate ordinary people to get involved in public discussions of important issues 4.72 (1.76) 6.25 (1.17)
Point people toward possible solutions to society’s problems 4.84 (1.67) 5.79 (1.47)
Cronbach’s Alpha .64 .67
Civic 4.46 (1.52) 4.77 (1.44)
Conduct polls to learn citizen’s priorities on issues 4.46 (2.08) 3.74 (2.08)
Convene meetings of citizen’s and community leaders to discuss public issues 3.94 (2.04) 4.28 (1.99)
Make special efforts to motivate citizens to participate in decision making on public
issues
4.71 (1.88) 5.61 (1.60)
Make special efforts to include ordinary citizens as sources in public affairs stories 4.71 (1.92) 5.31 (1.83)
Cronbach’s Alpha .77 .76
1.43, Inter-item correlation D.71). For experience as a citizen journalist, we asked how long
(in months) participants contributed news content to any online news publication.
Finally, in assessing similarities and differences between citizen journalists’ personal role
conceptions and their perceptions of professional journalists’ role conceptions, Pearson correla-
tion analyses and paired samples T-tests were employed. In evaluating predictive relationships,
we used hierarchical multiple regressions controlling after the demographic and individual
features.
Results
The sample. Approximately 65% of this sample of citizen journalists was male with
86.4% representing white participants. Respondents were highly educated with about 81%
MEDIA CREDIBILITY AND JOURNALISTIC ROLE CONCEPTIONS 279
holding either a bachelor’s degree or a graduate/professional degree. In terms of income level,
23.6% of the respondents earned between $50,000 and $74,999; another 16.4% reported earning
between $75,000 and $99,999. The mean age of the respondents was 44 years old (sd D13.13).
On average, survey participants have been contributing content to news sites for three years
and six months, or 43.21 months (sd D32.53). Most participants leaned toward being liberal
in terms of ideology (MD5.41; sd D1.43).
Citizen and professional journalists’ role conceptions. In order to assess citizen jour-
nalists’ perceptions of their journalistic functions and also their views on professional journal-
ists’ roles (RQ1), we first identified the five role conceptions established in Weaver and his
colleagues’ two most recent American journalists survey—disseminator, interpreter, adversary,
populist mobilizer and the civic role (see Table 1). These five roles were prominently featured
in the current analyses. However, upon closer examination it is evident that citizen journalists
rated the importance of these roles differently. For example, citizens rated the populist mobilizer
as the most prominent role when contributing journalistic content. This was followed by
the prominence of the adversary role. Additionally, citizen journalists rated the interpreter
role as the most prominent role for professional journalists, followed by the disseminator
role. The disseminator role, which is essentially a task of surveillance and supported by
the values of objectivity (Christians et al., 2009), was rated third in prominence for citizen
journalists. Contrary to findings from previous studies (see Heider et al., 2005), the civic role
was considered the least prominent role for citizen journalists and also as an unpopular role
for professional journalists.
In addressing the relationship between citizen journalists’ perceptions of their roles and their
perceptions of professional journalists’ roles, the correlation matrix shows that the professional
journalistic roles are highly correlated with each other. For example, the professional dissemi-
nator role is correlated with the interpreter (rD.58, p.01), and the populist mobilizer (rD
.36, p.01) roles; the interpreter role is associated with the adversary (rD.36, p.01) and
populist mobilizer (rD.37, p.01) roles; the adversary role is associated with the populist
mobilizer (rD.25, p.01) role; and the populist mobilizer is associated with the civic role
(rD.49, p.01).
Likewise, citizen journalistic roles are highly correlated with each other. For example, the
citizen disseminator role is correlated with the interpreter (rD.44, p.01), mobilizer (rD
.25, p.01), and civic roles (rD.23, p.05); the interpreter role is correlated with the
adversary (rD.44, p.01), populist mobilizer (rD.45, p.01), and civic roles (rD.40,
p.01); the adversary role with the populist mobilizer (rD.41, p.01) and civic roles (rD
.22, p.05); and the populist mobilizer role with the civic role (rD.62, p.01). Thus, in this
group, the civic role is associated with all other citizen journalism role conceptions whereas
in the professional group, the civic role was associated solely with the populist mobilizer role.
In general, corresponding roles are positively correlated with each other with the exception
of the interpreter roles. For example, the disseminator (rD.35, p.01), adversary (rD
.63, p.01), populist mobilizer (rD.35, p.01), and civic (rD.57, p.01) roles are
positively correlated. While not all roles are correlated with each other, the role conceptions
among and between professional and citizen journalists overlap and are shared. See Table 2
for the corresponding correlation matrix.
TABLE 2
Correlations Among Role Conceptions
Disseminator
PJ
Disseminator
CJ
Interpreter
PJ
Interpreter
CJ
Adversary
PJ
Adversary
CJ
Mobilizer
PJ
Mobilizer
CJ
Civic
PJ
Civic
CJ
Disseminator PJ .348** .578** .063 .118 .140 .357** .094 .124 .004
Disseminator CJ .230* .438** .179 .104 .148 .250** .001 .234*
Interpreter PJ .121 .358** .007 .369** .054 .090 .039
Interpreter CJ .388** .436** .176 .452** .121 .397**
Adversary PJ .629** .249** .253** .110 .122
Adversary CJ .089 .408** .068 .217*
Mobilizer PJ .349** .490** .284**
Mobilizer CJ .314** .615**
Civic PJ .569**
Civic CJ
Note. 1. **p.01, *p.05, Sig. (2-tailed); 2. PJ DProfessional Journalist, CJ DCitizen Journalist.
280
MEDIA CREDIBILITY AND JOURNALISTIC ROLE CONCEPTIONS 281
To further assess the degree to which the role conceptions held by citizen journalists
differ for themselves and professional journalists, a series of paired samples T-tests were
conducted. These analyses reveal there are statistically significant differences between how
citizen journalists perceive their own roles versus professional journalists’ roles. Among the five
dimensions, citizen journalists rated two of these roles as higher in importance for themselves
over their professional counterparts. This held true for the populist mobilizer and civic roles.
The disseminator and interpreter roles were still rated significantly higher in importance for
professional journalists. The adversary role, however, was not viewed differently between the
two groups (see Table 3).
To identify predictors of the perceived journalistic role conceptions, in particular the effect
of citizen journalists’ perceived media credibility (RQ2), a hierarchical multiple regression was
employed for each role conception. As shown in Table 4, generally, the models that predict
the role conceptions of citizen journalists perform better than those of professional journalists.
All the variances explained for citizen journalists (e.g., interpreter, 25.2%; adversary, 14.7%;
mobilizer, 28.4%; and civic, 24.0%) were larger with the exception of the disseminator role
(14.9% for professional journalists).
Likewise, the media credibility variable performed better for citizen journalists’ role concep-
tions: interpreter (16.5%), adversary (4.7%), mobilizer (19.8%), and civic (13.4%). As in the
previous example, the disseminator role (7.1%) performed better for professional journalists.
In particular, mainstream media credibility was positively related to the disseminator (ˇD
.28, p.01) and interpreter (ˇD.25, p.05) professional role conceptions, while it was
negatively associated with the interpreter (ˇD .28, p.01) and mobilizer (ˇD .23, p
.05) citizen roles. That is, the more credible mainstream news media are perceived, the more
likely participants found professional journalists’ role conceptions, namely the disseminator
and interpreter roles, to be important. For citizen journalists’ role conceptions, such as the
interpreter and mobilizer roles, associations were found to emerge in the opposite direction.
For example, the less credible mainstream media were perceived, the more likely participants
felt the interpreter and populist mobilizer roles were essential.
In contrast, citizen news media credibility was positively associated with all the role con-
ceptions of citizen journalists. Citizen news media credibility was also positively related with
the civic role of professional journalists (ˇD.25, p.05). In other words, citizen news
media credibility was a strong predictor of all the role conceptions of citizen journalists: the
more credible citizen news media are perceived, the more important the role conceptions of
TABLE 3
Paired Samples T-Test between Role Conceptions
Variables Mean Difference t df
Disseminator PJ–Disseminator CJ 5.79-5.04 D.75 4.88** 107
Interpreter PJ–Interpreter CJ 5.98-4.99 D.99 5.96** 107
Adversary PJ–Adversary CJ 5.01-5.11 D .09 .675 107
Mobilizer PJ–Mobilizer CJ 4.34-5.47 D 1.13 9.671** 107
Civic PJ–Civic CJ 4.45-4.76 D .31 2.295* 107
Note. 1. **p.01, *p.05, Sig. (2-tailed); 2. PJ DProfessional Journalist, CJ DCitizen Journalist.
TABLE 4
Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analyses for Role Conceptions
Disseminator Interpreter Adversary Mobilizer Civic
PJ (108) CJ (110) PJ (108) CJ (110) PJ (108) CJ (110) PJ (108) CJ (110) PJ (108) CJ (110)
Demographics
Gender (female) .03 .06 .08 .01 .01 .16 .01 .144 .11 .16#
Age .24* .17 .02 .07 .09 .16 .21#.06 .13 .14
Education .18 .02 .02 .11 .09 .08 .07 .08 .15 .08
Household income .09 .09 .01 .04 .02 .03 .05 .06 .01 .08
Ideology (Liberal) .08 .01 .10 .18 .34*** .22* .05 .08 .01 .03
Experience .07 .03 .14 .15#.05 .12 .06 .14 .01 .15#
Incremental R2(%) 7.8 3.0 6.5 8.7 12.8* 10.0#3.5 8.6 7.1 10.6#
Credibility
Mainstream Media .28** .05 .25* .28** .01 .12 .14 .23* .16 .11
Citizen Media .07 .18#.07 .34*** .07 .20#.14 .43*** .25* .39***
Incremental R2(%) 7.1* 2.9 4.8#16.5*** 0.3 4.7#2.4 19.8*** 5.5* 13.4***
Total R2(%) 14.9* 5.9 11.3 25.2*** 13.1#14.7* 5.9 28.4*** 12.6#24.0***
Note. 1. Cell entries are standardized regression coefficients; 2. #p.10, *p.05, **p.01, ***p.001; 3. PJ DProfessional Journalists, CJ DCitizen
Journalists; 4. Parentheses indicate total cases analyzed.
282
MEDIA CREDIBILITY AND JOURNALISTIC ROLE CONCEPTIONS 283
citizen journalists. These findings provide significant implications regarding the independent
contribution of citizen journalists’ perceptions on media credibility in assessing their various
role conceptions along with those of professional journalists.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
This study is one of the first to assess citizen journalists’ views of their growing news contribut-
ing activities and taps into how they view their roles as compared to their views of professional
journalists’ roles. The findings echo the resilience of traditional media role conceptions, as they
were also found among the citizens’ perceptions of their personal journalistic role conceptions.
These findings also reveal the stability of views for civic journalism values although not
considered nearly as prominent as other more established role conceptions. However, most
important is the prominence of their perceptions of the populist mobilizer, especially regarding
their own citizen journalism roles, that allows audiences to take on more involved roles as
part of the news consumption process. The populist mobilizer role, in being consistent with
its normative character, focuses on allowing audiences to play a more active part in the news
consumption process and encourages dialogue and engaged participation to enrich and improve
citizens’ lives (Christians et al., 2009). This, in turn, may lead to public discussions among
news audiences regarding public affairs and common interests. Citizen journalists as ordinary
citizens can better serve to mobilize other ordinary citizens through social networks into public
discussions where citizen journalists also can participate as discussants in the process.
While the correlation matrix yielded various associations, unlike the findings from previous
studies of professional journalists (Nah & Chung, 2009), citizen journalists’ perceived role
conceptions are not necessarily fully associated with those of professional journalists. In
other words, these findings indicate these roles may be closely related but at the same time
distinct. The results reveal the somewhat unique perspectives attributed to the interpreter roles
as they were not associated across the two groups’ assessments. Specifically, the interpreter
role was considered the most prominent for professional journalists while comparatively it was
considered much less prominent for citizen journalists. Thus, while roles are shared and overlap
is present, citizen journalists distinguish who carries out certain journalistic functions.
Further, the paired samples t-test revealed that contrary to assessments by professional
journalists and editors (Nah & Chung, 2009), citizen journalists view their roles as equally
prominent (e.g., adversary role) or at times even more prominent (e.g., populist mobilizer and
civic roles) than their professional counterparts. These findings are meaningful in illustrating
the growing roles citizen journalists perceive themselves to perform along with professionally
trained media workers further underscoring the increasingly blending roles of traditionally
distinct senders and receivers of information. News audiences, particularly those who contribute
journalistic content, appear to welcome the opportunity to act as participant and appreciate the
chance to share a voice and become part of the culture of information communication. These
findings point to a desire for an open source ethics that is more inclusive of nonmember
participation in discussion, criticism and content contribution (Ward & Wasserman, 2010).
It also appears, however, that citizen reporters still view the interpreter role to be primary to
mainstream journalists in properly informing the citizenry regarding public affairs information.
Perhaps the gatekeeping and agenda-setting functions of the media are still perceived as primary
284 CHUNG AND NAH
to traditional media outlets, while the watchdog role of the media seems to be more diffuse
and perceived to be shared by news audiences, particularly those who act as citizen reporters.
However, opportunities for audience involvement appear to be welcomed by citizen journalists
but perceived to be significantly less encouraged by traditional media professionals as supported
by the differences of perspectives found in both populist mobilizer and civic roles.
In other words, traditional roles are still considered as important roles for professional
journalists. However, citizen journalists consider relatively new roles, such as the populist
mobilizer and civic roles, to be more prominent among themselves than their counterparts. This
indicates citizen journalists, who lie between professional and amateur or pro-ams, consider
their roles as more closely attached to ordinary citizens. This may likely suggest citizen
journalists compete with professional journalists as informational sources.
In particular, it appears citizen journalists’ perceptions of media credibility are a significant
factor in predicting their journalism role conceptions although this variable predicts the two
role conceptions of professional and citizen journalists in different ways. For example, main-
stream news media credibility plays an important role for the traditional roles of professional
journalists, while citizen media credibility plays a critical role for all citizen journalists’ role
conceptions but most strongly for the populist mobilizer and civic roles with the interpreter
function being a close third. This indicates citizen journalists in this study build their belief
system as journalists through the journalistic value of credibility and appear to place meaning
on credibility just as much as their professional counterparts. Given that there is debate and
criticism on the status of citizen reporters as news sources and concern regarding the veracity
and objectivity of their journalistic contributions, it is important to recognize citizen media
credibility can influence how citizen journalists perceive their journalistic roles as compared to
those of professional journalists.
Specifically, when the mainstream news media is perceived to provide credible information,
this influences citizen journalists’ perceptions, leading them to rate higher the importance
of professional journalists’ ability to provide interpretive news quickly to a wide audience.
However, when citizen journalists perceive the mainstream media are not providing credible
news, they are likely to believe it is appropriate to act as informational sources and take on
the functions of providing further interpretation of delinquent news media events and also
mobilizing citizens to become more involved public actors. Likewise, these same individuals
believe when it comes to citizen media sources, the various roles are impacted by its credibility
of content. This suggests citizen journalists are more likely to perform a range of functions
generally associated with the mainstream media when the information they provide as citizens
are viewed as acceptable.
Furthermore, while Nah and Chung (2012) found general media credibility to be a predictor
for the role conceptions of professional journalists but not citizen reporters in a study about
online community news audiences, this study found even mainstream media credibility to be
a predictor of citizen journalistic functions (i.e., negative predictors) based on the perceptions
of citizen journalists. Thus, these findings provide evidence that the perceptions of citizen
journalists who actively provide news content are distinct from those of the general online
news audience. These findings support the idea that citizen journalists hold more assertive
views regarding their roles as information providers and are more likely to uphold traditional
practices (e.g., adhering to objective news reporting) and conform to the authoritative culture
of professional journalists.
MEDIA CREDIBILITY AND JOURNALISTIC ROLE CONCEPTIONS 285
In sum, this study contributes to the body of literature on citizen journalism by attempting
to identify journalists’ role conceptions from citizen journalists themselves. In particular,
citizen journalists’ perceived media credibility was assessed to identify associations between
professional and citizen journalism role conceptions. While media credibility and roles describe
a small portion of the media ethics landscape, they touch on core journalistic values, such as
objectivity and truth telling. Perceptions of credibility seem to function as a core belief in
how citizen journalists identify with specific positions on their roles as informational sources
and their views of professional journalists’ functions. Such assessments could help realign
the goals of journalists as they reach out to their audiences and help keep them informed and
engaged with their communities. These findings also warrant further consideration for a system
of open ethics where the conceptualization of credible news is broadened to include stories
contributed from outside the core profession. Additionally, the normative practices of the media
should be more sensitive to evolving relationships between the news media and its publics and
contemporary social and political realities (Christians et al., 2009). It is possible then to suggest
the ethical norms and practices of the profession be extended to these new storytellers who
also partake in the experience of doing journalism. Thus, just as trained professionals, these
new informational sources find credible stories to be the foundation to their contributions,
which exhibits the “inextricable interconnection of roles, values, and content” (Hayes, Singer,
& Ceppos, 2007, p. 263).
However, this study has several limitations. First, although every effort was made to recruit
all participants on a citizen and community journalism list, this study is still limited in scope
due to its small final participant pool. As citizen journalism is not a central occupation for
many participants, the fluid nature of citizen journalism itself appears to be a challenge in
identifying a sample for such investigations. Second, an online survey was employed, and
thus, the sample suffers from the inherent limitations of such methods. Third, weak inter-item
correlation scores (e.g., disseminator role) limited further analysis and interpretation of the data,
thus, future studies should aim to strengthen the reliability of such measures. Fourth, the role
conception question items that were used in the present assessment are derived from traditional
notions of journalistic activities. Rather than working from a preexisting frame, future studies
may consider developing a new list of questions working from current perspectives of citizen
journalists to better understand the potentially growing roles they may perform in their news
production and consumption activities. Finally, perception of roles cannot be equated with
actual practice, and, thus, the findings from this study are limited to the survey methodology
itself.
Nonetheless, this study builds on the body of literature addressing the growing activities
facilitated by citizen journalists and expands the role conceptions literature of professional
journalists into the role conceptions of citizen journalists. It also reveals valuable insights
into the ways traditionally passive news audiences are taking on more involved roles as they
contribute content to citizen and mainstream news outlets as journalists themselves. Further,
credibility (both mainstream and citizen levels) was found to be a significant predictor for both
professional and citizen journalism role conceptions while performing stronger for citizen roles.
The findings from this study may help professional news organizations to better understand
actively engaged citizen contributors’ perceptions of the mainstream news media’s functions
and the positions citizen journalists hold as agents of participation functioning as relevant actors
in their news production and consumption experiences.
286 CHUNG AND NAH
NOTES
1. The keyword search yielded the following five websites:
1. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title DList _of_citizen_jo urnalism_websites
[source: sourcewatch]
2. http://www.dmoz.org/News/Media/Participatory// [source: open directory project]
3. http://www.kcnn.org/citmedia_sites/ [source: kcnn, new voices]
4. http://www.cyberjournalist.net/news/002226.php [source: cyberjournalist.net
<http://cyberjournalist.net>]
5. http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Top-citizen-journalism-sites-to-upload-
video-34626.htm
2. The Bivings Group. The use of the Internet by America’s newspapers. Retrieved from
http://www.bivingsreport.com/campaign/newspapers06_tz-fgb.pdf
3. The task involved searching through 1,042 sites in which 102 were duplicate listings,
425 were not functioning or not qualified for the study (e.g., news aggregator), and 107
did not list contact information.
4. On two occasions, participants asked if they could circulate the survey on a citizen media
listserv. We allowed these participants to forward the survey link.
5. As the total individual contacts to citizen journalists other than the extensive list that had
been developed are unknown, calculation of the exact response rate was not possible.
REFERENCES
Abel, J. D., & Wirth, M. O. (1977). Newspaper vs. TV credibility for local news. Journalism Quarterly, 54(2), 371–375.
Beam, R., Weaver, D. H., & Brownlee, B. J. (2009). Changes in professionalism of U.S. journalists in the turbulent
twenty-first century. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,86(2), 277–298.
Bowman, S., & Willis, C. (2003). We media: How audiences are how audiences are shaping the future of news and
information. Retrieved from http://www.hypergene.net/wemedia/weblog.php
Burbules, N. C. (2001). Paradoxes of the web: The ethical dimensions of credibility. Library Trends,49(3), 441–453.
Cassidy, W. P. (2005). Variations on a theme: The professional role conceptions of print and online newspaper
journalists. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,82(2), 264–280.
Cassidy, W. P. (2007). Online news credibility: An examination of the perceptions of newspaper journalists. Journal
of Computer-Mediated Communication,12(2). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue2/cassidy.html
Carpenter, S. (2010). A study of content diversity in online citizen journalism and online newspaper articles. New
Media & Society,12(7), 1064–1084.
Chung, D. S., & Nah, S. (2009). The effects of interactive news presentation on perceived user satisfaction of online
community newspapers. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 855–874.
Cleary, J., & Bloom, T. (2011). Gatekeeping at the portal: An analysis of local television websites’ user-generated
content. Electronic News,5(2), 93–111.
Cohen, B. (1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Couper, M. R. (2000). Review: Web surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly,64, 464–494.
Christians, C. G., Glasser, T., McQuail, D., Nordenstreng, K., & White, R. A. (2009). Normative theories of the media:
Journalism in democratic societies. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. New York, NY: Holt.
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2011). From Encyclopaedia Britannica to Wikipedia: Generational differences in
the perceived credibility of encyclopedia information. Information, Communication & Society,14(3), 355–374.
Friedland, L., & Kim, N. (2009). Citizen journalism. In C. H. Sterling (Ed.), Encyclopedia of journalism (pp. 297–302).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
MEDIA CREDIBILITY AND JOURNALISTIC ROLE CONCEPTIONS 287
Friend, C., & Singer, J. B. (2007). Online journalism ethics: Traditions and transitions. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
Gaziano, C., & McGrath, K. (1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism Quarterly,63(3), 451–462.
Haas, T. (2005). From “public journalism” to the “public’s journalism”? Rhetoric and reality in the discourse of
weblogs. Journalism Studies,6(3), 387–396.
Hayes, A. S., Singer, J. B., & Ceppos, J. (2007). Shifting roles, enduring values: The credible journalist in a digital
age. Journal of Mass Media Ethics,22(4), 262–279.
Heider, D., McCombs, M., & Poindexter, P. M. (2005). What the public expects of local news: Views on public and
traditional journalism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,82(4), 952–967.
Janowitz, M. (1975). Professional models in journalism: The gatekeeper and advocate. Journalism Quarterly,52(4),
618–626.
Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (1998). Cruising is believing? Comparing Internet and traditional sources on media
credibility measures. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,75(2), 325–340.
Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2000). Using is believing: The influence of reliance on the credibility of online
political information among politically interested Internet users. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,
77(4), 865–879.
Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2002). Webelievability: A path model examining how convenience and reliance predict
online credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79(3), 619–642.
Johnson, T., & Kaye, B. K. (2004). Wag the blog: How reliance on traditional media and the Internet influence
credibility perceptions of weblogs among blog users. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,81(3), 622–
642.
Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2009). In blog we trust? Deciphering credibility of components of the Internet among
politically interested Internet users. Computers in Human Behavior,25(1), 175–182.
Johnstone, J. W. C., Slawski, E. J., & Bowman, W. W. (1976). The news people: A sociological portrait of American
journalists and their work. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Kim, D., & Johnson, T. (2009). A shift in media credibility: Comparing Internet and traditional news sources in South
Korea. International Communication Gazette, 71(4), 283–302.
Kramer, S. D. (2004, November). Journos and bloggers: Can both survive? Online Journalism Review. Retrieved from
http://www.ojr.org/ojr/workplace/1100245630.php
Lasica, J. D. (2003). Blogs and journalism need each other. Nieman Reports, 57(3), 70–74.
Lippmann, W. (1925). The phantom public. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace.
Metzger, M. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2000). Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journalism & Mass Commu-
nication Quarterly,77(3), 515–540.
Miller, A., & Kurpius, D. (2010). A citizen-eye view of television news source credibility. American Behavioral
Scientist,54(2), 137–156.
Nah, S. (2008). Citizen reporters. In S. Vaughn (Ed.), Encyclopedia of American journalism (pp. 100–103). New York,
NY: Routledge.
Nah, S., & Chung, D. S. (2009). Rating citizen journalists versus pros: Editors’ views. Newspaper Research Journal,
30(2), 71–83.
Nah, S., & Chung, D. S. (2012). When citizens meet both professional and citizen journalists: Social trust, media
credibility, and perceived journalistic roles among online community news readers. Journalism: Theory, Practice &
Criticism, 13(6), 714–730.
Nah, S., Veenstra, A. S., & Shah, D. V. (2006). The Internet and anti-war activism: A case study of information,
expression and action. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,12(1), 230–247. Retrieved from http://online
library.wiley.com.ezproxy.uky.edu/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00323.x/full
Newhagen, J., & Mass, C. (1989). Differential criteria for evaluating credibility of newspaper and TV news. Journalism
Quarterly, 66(2), 277–284.
Porter, S. R., & Whitcomb, M. E. (2003). The impact of contact type on web survey response rates. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 67, 579–588.
Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the news. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Singer, J. (2010). Norms and the network: Journalistic ethics in a shared media space. In C. Meyers (Ed.), Journalism
ethics: A philosophical approach (pp. 117–129). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Tuchman, G. (1972). Objectivity as strategic ritual: An examination of newsmen’s notions of objectivity. American
Journal of Sociology,77(4), 660–679.
Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York, NY: Free Press.
288 CHUNG AND NAH
Ward, S. J. A. (2010). Inventing objectivity: New philosophical foundations. In C. Meyers (Ed.), Journalism ethics: A
philosophical approach (pp. 137–152). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Ward, S. J. A., & Wasserman, H. (2010). Toward an open ethics: Implications of new media platforms for global
ethics discourse. Journal of Mass Media Ethic: Exploring Questions of Media Morality,25(4), 275–292.
Weaver, D. H., Beam, R. A., Brownlee, B. J., Voakes, P. S., & Wilhoit, G. C. (2007). The American journalist in the
21st century: U.S. news people at the dawn of a new millennium. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Weaver, D. H., & Wilhoit, G. C. (1986). The American journalist: A portrait of U.S. news people and their work.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Weaver, D. H., & Wilhoit, G. C. (1996). The American journalist in the 1990s: U.S. news people at the end of an era.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
CopyrightofJournalofMassMediaEthicsisthepropertyofTaylor&FrancisLtdandits
contentmaynotbecopiedoremailedtomultiplesitesorpostedtoalistservwithoutthe
copyrightholder'sexpresswrittenpermission.However,usersmayprint,download,oremail
articlesforindividualuse.