Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change: A review of previous research and call for more critical approaches

Abstract

Indigenous journalism can facilitate the inclusion of Indigenous voices in the public sphere, thereby contributing to social change. Contemporary Indigenous journalism is in part facilitated by the introduction and diffusion of paradigmatic media innovations, including the Internet, mobile technology, and social media. Based on a literature review, we investigate how media innovations are understood to facilitate Indigenous journalism and find that few empirical studies directly address this question. Analyses of Indigenous journalism, reaching beyond the potential for increased access to media and for amplification of Indigenous voice, are lacking. Furthermore, little research investigates how the appropriation of new technological affordances influence the production of Indigenous journalism. Our review also indicates that while Indigenous political participation can be facilitated by media innovation, these innovations can also serve to reinforce existing power relations. We submit that more critical analytical approaches are required to investigate how media innovations might facilitate the potential of Indigenous journalism for social change.

Full text

185
NORDICOM REVIEW
Ní Bhroin, N., Sand, S., & Rasmussen,T. (2021). Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and
social change: A review of previous research and call for more critical approaches. Nordicom
Review, 42(2), 185–206. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2021-00502020-0006
Indigenous journalism, media innovation,
and social change
A review of previous research
and call for more critical approaches
Niamh Ní Bhroin,I Stine Sand,II & Torkel RasmussenIII
I Department of Media and Communication, University of Oslo, Norway
II Department of Tourism and Northern Studies, UiT, The Arctic University of Norway
III Department of Sámi Teacher Education and Indigenous Journalism, Sámi University College, Norway
Abstract
Indigenous journalism can facilitate the inclusion of Indigenous voices in the public
sphere, thereby contributing to social change. Contemporary Indigenous journalism is
in part facilitated by the introduction and diusion of paradigmatic media innovations,
including the Internet, mobile technology, and social media. Based on a literature review,
we investigate how media innovations are understood to facilitate Indigenous journalism
and nd that few empirical studies directly address this question. Analyses of Indigenous
journalism, reaching beyond the potential for increased access to media and for amplica-
tion of Indigenous voice, are lacking. Furthermore, little research investigates how the
appropriation of new technological aordances inuence the production of Indigenous
journalism. Our review also indicates that while Indigenous political participation can be
facilitated by media innovation, these innovations can also serve to reinforce existing power
relations. We submit that more critical analytical approaches are required to investigate how
media innovations might facilitate the potential of Indigenous journalism for social change.
Keywords: Indigenous journalism, media innovation, social change, Indigenous political
participation, marginalisation
Introduction: The burgeoning eld of Indigenous journalism research
During the past twenty years, researchers have explored what they claim to be “a
burgeoning field” of Indigenous journalism (Hokowhitu & Devadas, 2013: xvi; see
also Hanusch, 2013; Hartley & McKee, 2000). This burgeoning is attributed in part to
the introduction, diusion, and appropriation of paradigmatic innovations in media and
communication technologies (Alia, 2010), including the Internet, mobile technology, and
social media (Sweet et al., 2013; Alia, 2010). Alia (2010) argues that cell phones have
fostered social change in Africa, and that blogs can be used as tools for highlighting

186
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
injustice. Hanusch (2014a: 953) also maintains that media innovations have “allowed
Indigenous societies to tell their own stories in culturally specic ways, enabling them
to engage in (re)building their own identities”.
It has been argued that Indigenous journalism, as a reaction to mainstream journal-
ism, can play a role in the promotion of social change by facilitating the inclusion of
Indigenous voices in the public sphere (Hanusch, 2013; Skogerbø et al., 2019; Sweet et
al., 2013). However, the practice of journalism can also reinforce existing power rela-
tions (Fussey & Roth, 2020; Golding, 2018; Herman & Chomsky, 2002; McChesney &
Nichols, 2010; Waller et al., 2015). Research exploring the marginalisation of Indigenous
voices in the public sphere also support this theory. In Scandinavia, for example, cover-
age of Indigenous aairs has been found to be conict-oriented and racist, contributing
to the exotication and marginalisation of Indigenous communities, cultures, languages,
and ways of life (Ijäs, 2012; Sand, 2019; Skogerbø, 2000). Furthermore, research that
analyses media innovations problematises the extent to which these innovations facilitate
social change (see Ess, 2014; Krumsvik et al., 2019).
The use of the collective concept “Indigenous journalism” to describe the practice
of journalism – both by and relating to Indigenous people – has increased signicantly
parallel to these developments. The phenomenon this concept refers to is, however,
signicantly older. Researchers have previously investigated the production of journal-
ism by Indigenous people since at least 1840 (Day, 1990). These investigations usually
referred to the practices of specic Indigenous people, for example, Sámi, Māori, or
Cherokee journalism; or collective groups, such as Native, Aboriginal, or First Nations
journalism. An increasing body of more recent research, however, refers to the concept
of Indigenous journalism. A central claim of this research is that a “renaissance” of this
practice is occurring, attributed in part to the diusion and appropriation of paradigmatic
media innovations (see Hanusch, 2013; Alia, 2010; Sweet et al., 2013). This growing
body of research has not been the subject of a structured review to date; therefore, in
this article, we report on a review of this research. Our review aims to identify the sta-
tus of knowledge on this topic, critically assess the claims that are made, and point to
directions for future research.
Based on our review, we argue that research exploring Indigenous journalism needs
to take a more critical approach to the ways in which the diusion and appropriation of
media innovations facilitate or constrain Indigenous journalism in practice. We nd, for
example, that analyses of the process of Indigenous journalism, beyond the potential
for increased access to media and for amplication of Indigenous voice, are lacking.
Furthermore, little research investigates how new technological aordances might
inuence the production of Indigenous journalism or related variations in journalistic
norms. Research exploring how Indigenous political participation can be facilitated by
media innovation also indicates that these innovations can serve to reinforce existing
power relations.
We submit that more critical analytical approaches are required to investigate how
media innovations might facilitate the potential of Indigenous journalism for social
change.

187
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
Indigenous journalism:
What it denotes and how it has been approached
Indigenous journalism as a eld of study is characterised by conceptual disagreement.
Krøvel (2017) claims that Gema Tabares Merino introduced the concept of “Indigenous
journalism”. Grounded in empirical observations of journalism connected to Indigenous
organisations and communities on radio stations and online, Gema Tabares Merino was
referring to what she considered to be a relatively new form of journalism developing
in Latin America (Krøvel, 2017).
Gema Tabares Merino conceptualises Indigenous journalism as a form of “collec-
tive work”, involving “thinking and action” for Indigenous communication (as cited in
Krøvel, 2017: 192). It includes three central dimensions:
First, indigenous journalism must respond to the needs of indigenous peoples.
Second, the communication must highlight the crisis of the ‘Occident’ and re-
value the knowledge and life forms of indigenous peoples as a viable alternative.
[Third], the technologies underpinning [Indigenous journalism] must be placed
at the service of indigenous life and culture. (Krøvel, 2017: 193)
The “collective work” concept is particularly appropriate, as Indigenous journalism is
understood to have developed through local communitarian action that has been further
mediated by national and continental meetings, discussions, and networks (Krøvel,
2017).
Related to this, Meadows (2009) has investigated the importance of journalism in
representing Indigenous peoples and their aairs for non-Indigenous people. He argues
that incorrect, biased, or missing representations of Indigenous peoples reinforce the
construction of worldviews based on (mis)information. It is through worldviews that
opinions are formed, and these opinions lead to actions. Meadows argues that because of
this, many Indigenous peoples have turned their backs on mainstream media and started
engaging in their own forms of cultural production (Meadows, 2009).
From a more theoretical perspective, Hanusch (2013) develops ve main dimensions
to conceptualise and analyse Indigenous journalism: a role in the empowerment of Indig-
enous people; the ability to oer a counter-narrative to mainstream media reporting; a
role in language revitalisation; a role in culturally appropriate reporting; and a watchdog
function. Hanusch’s (2013) dimensions of Indigenous journalism have, however, been
criticised because they imply an articial contrasting of Indigenous journalism with other
forms of journalism (Todorova, 2016). There is, in fact, signicant overlap between the
dimensions outlined by Hanusch and what is often referred to as journalism’s ideal types
of values (Deuze, 2005), namely public service, objectivity, autonomy, immediacy, and
ethics. The dimension of language revitalisation, however, appears to be unique.
Further complicating matters, research on Indigenous journalism also operationalises
the “Indigenous” concept in dierent ways. The term “Indigenous” is usually used as a
political and strategic reference to people who have experienced histories of oppression
and marginalisation. According to the World Bank (2021), between 370 and 500 mil-
lion – or around 5 per cent of the world’s total population – are Indigenous. However,
this collective concept masks many dierences among and between Indigenous people.
For example, groups have distinct names to self-identify, such as “Aboriginal”, “Torres
Strait Islanders”, “Māori”, “First Nations”, “Inuit”, or “Sámi”.

188
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) declines to
adopt an ocial denition, but proposes “a modern understanding”, based on self-
identication and acceptance as a community member. At the core of this concept is a
requirement to recognise dierence, in terms of historical continuity; links to territories
and natural resources; social, economic, and political systems; languages; cultures; and
power relations (United Nations, 2004). According to Walter and Andersen (2013), it is
precisely because of this diversity that the concept does not have an ocial denition.
Some Indigenous communities have also been conceptualised by Walter and Andersen
(2013: 9) as “colonized rst world Indigenous Peoples”. These people share colonial
histories but are also socially, economically, and politically positioned in colonised rst
world nations. This builds on Dyck’s (1985) denition of fourth world peoples, who,
• are Indigenous to the lands that form the nation state;
• have had their sovereignty and territory appropriated by settler colonialism;
• are economically and politically marginalized;
• have their Indigenous culture stigmatized by the dominant culture;
• are struggling for social justice and for a right to self-determination and
control over their traditional lands and resources; and
• constitute a tiny minority of the population of a nation, contributing to their
political powerlessness.
(as cited in Walter & Andersen 2013: 18)
These characteristics do not apply to all Indigenous people; for example, in the Pacic,
Samoans, Fijians, and Tongans are Indigenous and dominant groups in their island-states
– however, they also identify as Indigenous and are recognised as such.
In spite of these conceptual disagreements, research about Indigenous journalism
converges on the principle that it plays a role in social change, whether by promoting
collective work and Indigenous forms of life and language, or by facilitating Indigenous
participation in the public sphere through empowerment, culturally sensitive reporting,
the potential to generate counter-narratives, or a watchdog function. From this starting
point, we investigate research-based claims about how the practice that is increasingly
conceptualised as “Indigenous journalism” is facilitated or constrained by media in-
novation.
Media innovation and social change
Research about media innovations investigates change, including what is changing and
how novel the change might be. It also investigates the key inuences that support or
hinder change (Krumsvik et al., 2019). Because media are part of the social ecology,
media innovations are understood to both reect and bring about social change (Bruns,
2014; see also Castells, 2012; Jenkins, 2006). However, media innovation must have
some kind of economic or social impact to be considered an innovation (Dogruel, 2013).
Studies of the interrelationship between media innovation and social change em-
phasise the importance of analysing the socioeconomic and cultural contexts in which

189
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
innovations occur (Kannengießer, 2020; Krumsvik et al., 2019; Ní Bhroin, 2015b; Ní
Bhroin & Milan, 2020). Earlier research has found, for example, that access to new
media does not guarantee participation, as further obstacles for engagement with tech-
nology may exist (van Deursen & Helsper, 2015).
Research on media innovations focuses primarily on innovations in journalism and
news production, as well as on new opportunities for civic participation. It may therefore
provide a useful lens to synthesise our understanding of factors inuencing the develop-
ment of Indigenous journalism.
When investigating innovations in journalism, Belair-Gagnon and Steinke (2020)
argue that journalism is a process, where elements of production and consumption – in-
cluding audience engagement, structure, system, and network – play a role. Related to
this, da Silva and Sanseverino (2020) nd that digitally native news services establish
more meaningful connections with their audiences, which can in turn support business.
At the same time, new technological aordances introduce challenges for the produc-
tion of journalism. Muindi (2018), for example, explores how Kenyan journalists need
to juggle requirements for clarity, balance, and truth with the immediacy and spontane-
ity of communication on Twitter. Koivula, Villi, and Sivunen (2020) nd that although
media innovations present new opportunities for sharing ideas in dispersed journalism,
they also introduce uncertainty in the creative production process.
With regard to civic engagement, Rendueles and Sádaba, (2019) argue that digi-
talisation has transformed political participation and citizen mobilisation in diverse
and unexpected ways, and that the greatest innovations have taken place in what they
call “unconventional political participation”. At the same time, researchers argue that
explorations of the relationship between media innovation and social change should not
overemphasise the importance of technological transformation, but rather pay attention
to sustained power relations and patterns of inequality that prevail (see Fussey & Roth,
2020; Golding, 2018).
We therefore set out to investigate the extent to which research about Indigenous
journalism investigates or explains 1) how media innovations introduce change to In-
digenous journalism as a process, including its production and consumption, aspects of
audience engagement, structure, system, and networks; 2) whether new technological
aordances are understood to inuence journalistic norms in Indigenous journalism,
including requirements for clarity, balance and truth, and collaboration; and 3) how re-
search about Indigenous journalism analyses the role of media innovation in introducing
new opportunities for political participation.
Methodology
Our literature review was conducted in two iterations (October–December 2017 and
November 2020). In both instances, we searched for the term “Indigenous journalism”.
As previously discussed, the use of this collective concept masks a complex range of
dierences between and among Indigenous people. However, the rate at which research
referring to the concept is published has increased. One indication of this is the number
of results generated by our search protocol at each iteration. In October 2017, our search
resulted in 137 items; by November 2020, the total number of items had increased to
233 (see Figure 1 for a graphical representation of our search protocol).

190
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
Figure 1 Overview of search protocol
Search A (Oct–Dec 2017) Search B (Nov 2020)
Google Scholar: 137 items Google Scholar: 96 additional items
(233 items in total: 137 + 96)
â â
Duplicates removed: 125 items remained Duplicates removed: 92 additional items
remained (217 items in total: 125 + 92)
Cross-referenced findings with Web of Science, Nordicom, and Sociological Abstracts:
no new results
â â
Removed theses and publications that were
not peer reviewed and not in English:
55 items remained
Removed theses and publications that were
not peer reviewed and not in English:
46 additional items remained
â â
Removed publications that did not significantly
discuss “Indigenous journalism”:
29 items remained
Removed publications that did not significantly
discuss “Indigenous journalism”:
18 additional items remained
â â
Result: 47 items considered for further analysis
Comments: Search conducted according to the same protocol in two iterations. The second iteration took account of the increasing number
of studies referring to this topic.
We initially searched for the term “Indigenous journalism” in Google Scholar on 3
October 2017 and found 137 search results. Once we removed duplicates, we had 125
items. Between October and December 2017, we cross-referenced our search results
with searches for the same term in the Web of Science, Nordicom, and Sociological
Abstracts databases. No new items were found.
We excluded all unpublished theses and publications that were not peer reviewed,
not research-based, and not in the English language. We then analysed the remaining
55 items to determine whether they were relevant for our study. We reviewed the title
and abstract of each item, and those that did not include a discussion of “Indigenous
journalism” were discarded. We also excluded articles that referred primarily to Indig-
enous media (rather than Indigenous journalism or news media), environmental issues,
minority languages, or politics. Following this stage, 29 items were retained for review.
We divided these 29 items between our three co-authors, who each conducted a
close reading of one-third of the sample and developed analytical memos. At a meet-
ing in Alta, Norway (25–26 January 2018), we discussed the material and our memos
and developed a series of analytical categories with which to further analyse the entire
sample. From that point, we met at regular intervals to rene our categories and discuss
our developing analysis.
By the time our analysis was nalised for submission, our original search was somewhat
outdated. We therefore decided to re-run our protocol to ensure that we had not excluded
newer publications. On 17 November 2020, we found 96 additional results; removing
duplicates left 92 items for review. Following our protocol, we again checked the results
against the Web of Science, Nordicom, and Sociological Abstracts databases and did not
nd any new results. We then categorised our newer ndings according to publication type.

191
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
We again excluded all unpublished theses and publications that were not peer re-
viewed, not research-based, and not in the English language. We then analysed the
remaining 46 articles to determine whether they were relevant to the topic of our study.
Following our original protocol, we reviewed the title and abstract of each item and
discarded items that did not include a discussion of “Indigenous journalism”; 18 ad-
ditional articles were retained for review. Our material therefore consisted of a total of
47 articles. All articles were reviewed according to the analytical categories we had
previously developed. The analysis presented in this article is therefore a result of the
synthesis of both iterations of our search protocol.
Table 1 provides a breakdown of our search results by publication category according
to both iterations of our search.
Table 1 Search results by publication category
Publication Category 2017 2020 Cumulative
Research articles 59 51 110
Books 32 10 42
Book chapters 7 4 11
Book review 1 1 2
Conference papers 5 5 10
Theses 4 8 12
Encyclopaedia entries 0 3 3
Research indices 8 0 8
Citations 3 0 3
Websites 3 3 6
Newspaper or non-research-based periodical
articles 0 3 3
Reports 3 4 7
Total 125 92 217
Comments: Numbers reflect total items after removal of duplicates in each category.
Limitations
Our search protocol has a number of important limitations. First, we focused on the
collective concept of “Indigenous journalism” in order to review the increasing body of
research referring to this concept. We therefore did not search for research investigating
related practices referring to specic Indigenous people, such as Anishinaabe or Chero-
kee, or other collective concepts such as First Nations or Aboriginal. Further research
would be required to compare the outcomes of our study with this related research.
Second, our search focused on material in English. Research published in Spanish,
Taiwanese, and other languages are therefore not included in our sample, as our team
of researchers would not have been able to access or analyse this. Our search protocol
can, however, be replicated to investigate research in other languages and to compare
the ndings of such investigations with the present study.

192
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
Epistemology
Indigenous research requires reexive engagement with how the relative power of
researchers inuence representations of Indigenous people and knowledge (see Bull,
2002). Research inuences the construction of knowledge in ways that have real conse-
quences for the lives of Indigenous people – in particular, with regard to their represen-
tation in the public sphere (Olsen, 2018; Smith, 1999). As a team of three researchers,
two of us represent members of and close relations to Indigenous, and one to minority,
communities. We consider our diverse backgrounds and experiences a strength, because
they have ensured that we have taken a sensitive and reexive approach which has
underpinned the analytical focus of our collaboration. As Olsen (2018) argues, neither
privilege/oppression, Indigenous/non-Indigenous, nor insider/outsider refer to binary
relations, but to potential positions on relative scales. As a team of three co-authors,
we reected both individually and together on the multiplicity of positions we had with
regards to our own and each other’s backgrounds, and the potential consequences for
how we approached our analysis.
Material
Our material (see Appendices 1 & 2 for overviews) includes 47 studies about Indigenous
journalism in Australia and Oceania (n = 19), Africa (n = 13), North America (n = 5),
South America (n = 2), Asia (n = 2), and Northern Europe (n = 3); the remaining articles
have a global focus (n = 3). 35 articles focus on journalism and news media, and the
remaining 12 focus on Indigenous media, including a specic discussion of Indigenous
journalism. Only nine studies were published before 2010.
A range of methodological approaches were applied. Twelve articles are based on
interviews with journalists (n = 7); media producers (n = 2); and educators and students
(n = 1). Two focus group studies involve community and audience members. Three ad-
ditional mixed methods studies rely on interviews along with observation and survey
(Adeduntan, 2018); observation and archival research (M’Balla-Ndi, 2017); and analysis
of primary documents (Plaut, 2017).
Eight studies use content analysis: ve to review journalistic content, one teaching
programmes, one a radio programme, and one a participatory media platform. Three
additional mixed methods studies rely on content analysis along with historical analysis
(Hanusch, 2014b), survey methods (Nwagbara, 2013), and production analysis (Su, 2019).
Furthermore, nine case studies focus on dierent aspects of the production of Indig-
enous journalism. Examples include the development of an app to support representation,
the co-creation of stories with communities, and two journalism teaching programmes.
The remaining ten studies are predominantly theoretical and explore the evolution
of Indigenous journalism as this relates to African journalism (Berger, 2000; Shaw,
2009; Skjerdal, 2011; Tomaselli, 2003); Australian journalism (Hess & Waller, 2015;
McCallum & Posetti, 2008; Waller, 2010); as well as global Indigenous journalism
(Hanusch, 2013).
We also consider it important to note that in spite of ongoing calls for reexive ap-
proaches to Indigenous research and methodologies, only eight of the contributions
in our sample explicitly addressed the relationship of the researcher to the Indigenous
community studied.

193
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
Towards new opportunities for production and participation?
In this section we summarise and discuss our ndings. We 1) focus on how media in-
novations are understood to inuence the process of Indigenous journalism, including
its production and consumption; 2) indicate whether new technological aordances are
considered to inuence journalistic norms of clarity, balance, truth, or collaboration;
and 3) identify how research about Indigenous journalism analyses the role of media
innovations in introducing new opportunities for political participation.
Most of the studies in our sample (n = 40) claim that media innovations provide new
opportunities for the production and consumption of Indigenous journalism (see Bur-
rows, 2018; Gift et al., 2019; Hanusch, 2013, 2014b; Latimore et al., 2017; Stewart et
al., 2010). Three studies investigate journalism in Indigenous languages (Chibuwe &
Salawu, 2020; Cohen & McIntyre, 2019; Skogerbø et al., 2019); four explore how legacy
media, including both radio and television, can facilitate the distribution of Indigenous
journalism (Adeduntan, 2018; Meadows, 2009; Nwagbara, 2013; Waller et al., 2020);
and the remaining articles focus on how Indigenous journalism relates to particular
cultural values (Hanusch, 2014b, 2015; M’Balla-Ndi, 2017) or the rhetoric of this kind
of journalism (Lang, 2015).
Indigenous journalism as a process
Previous research acknowledges that racism and marginalisation have inuenced the
representation of Indigenous peoples and the participation of these people in the public
sphere (Hartley & McKee, 2000). One contributing factor is the historical lack of access
that Indigenous people have had to produce media content (Alia, 2010). Innovations in
media technologies are understood to change this situation (Hanusch, 2013).
A resulting, but problematic, assumption is that the process of Indigenous journal-
ism can address the problems of representation and civic engagement that Indigenous
communities experience. Our analysis nds that empirical analyses that prove these
assumptions are lacking. Ginsburg (2002, as cited in Hanusch, 2013: 84), for example,
argues that media technologies oer “possibilities for ‘talking back’ to and through the
categories that have been created to contain Indigenous people”, but documentation
supporting these hypotheses are seldom provided.
Indigenous journalism is also understood to support the amplication of Indigenous
voice, facilitating empowerment and social change (Hanusch, 2013). Within the context
of Indigenous media studies, Dreher, Waller, and McCallum (2018) have explored how
Indigenous people can gain voice in policy debates and engage in meaningful political
participation. Their analysis extends beyond how media might be used to amplify voice,
to question what can be heard in contemporary media ecologies and debates. They point
to the shifting technological, institutional, and political relationships that inuence – and
consequently may bear responsibility for – what can be heard (see also Hess & Waller,
2015; Waller, 2010).
Our analysis reveals that interview-based methods and content analyses are the most
dominant methodological approaches in this eld. However, only three of the interview-
based studies include the perspectives of Indigenous community and audience members.
Very few studies use cross-sectional survey methods; we therefore know very little about
how this kind of journalism is received. Audience research, including cross-sectional

194
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
methods, could be used to further investigate the consumption of Indigenous journalism
beyond individual case studies and across countries, contexts, and institutions.
One exception is a study by Ross (2017), who nds that Pacic audiences are not
likely to be driven by considerations of ethnicity when selecting the forms of journal-
ism they wish to consume. Furthermore, in a study of performative Yoruba-language
readings of English-language news, Adeduntan (2018) nds that audiences enjoy these
readings more than their consumption of the news. At the same time, the established
tradition of news reporting negatively impacts the research participants’ perceptions of
the legitimacy of these readings.
While the research we have reviewed claims that Indigenous journalism – as facili-
tated by media innovations – introduces new opportunities for Indigenous people to
access media, and therefore to amplify their voice in the public sphere, few empirical
studies explore the extent to which this is the case or investigate the processes of jour-
nalistic production that might lead to this. Furthermore, only three of the studies in our
sample explored the consumption of Indigenous journalism. We therefore know very
little about how Indigenous journalism is produced or consumed or how these processes
are facilitated in practice by media innovations.
New technological aordances
Indigenous journalism is conceptualised as a reaction to mainstream journalism facili-
tated by media innovation. At the same time, journalistic norms of accuracy, objectiv-
ity, and truth are found to prevail, albeit with some variation. The research we have
reviewed explores variation in norms at the level of journalistic production. However,
the focus is not on how these variations are inuenced by the exploitation of changing
technological aordances.
The norm of “objectivity”, for example, is of particular concern. Objectivity in In-
digenous journalism is considered to arise from the balancing of professional journal-
istic conventions with community and organisational responsibilities (Burrows, 2018;
Goyanes et al., 2020). Indigenous journalists are considered to have a responsibility to
work closely with Indigenous communities and to foster their development (Burrows,
2018). Lefkowich, Dennison, and Klein (2019) further emphasise the importance of co-
constructing journalism with local communities. They adopt co-participatory approaches
to developing journalism, where they “reimagine” the newsroom within the communities
they study, rather than being distinct from them.
Connected to this, tribal and social structures are also found to inuence the develop-
ment of Indigenous journalism. Hanusch (2015) nds that respect for elders, cultural
protocols, and culturally specic language inuence how Māori journalism is practised.
In their study of journalism amongst the Cherokee people, Tallent and Dingman (2011:
252) indicate that “although about 65 tribes in the United States have provisions for a
free press in their constitutions, many are prohibited from acting on this provision due
to tribal politics or other issues”.
A number of items in our material also identify critical attitudes towards Indigenous
journalism, including that it is too soft or partial (Burrows, 2018). Chibuwe and Salawu
(2020) further nd that one of the key reasons journalism students are not taught about
Indigenous perspectives is that lecturers have a low regard for this form of journalism

195
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
(see also Todorova, 2016). In one extreme example, Indigenous journalism is considered
to have played a role in promoting post-election violence in Kenya (Cohen & McIn-
tyre, 2019). At the same time, in her multi-sited ethnographic study in Burma, Brooten
(2006) questions the fundamental relevance of objectivity, particularly in the context
of conict journalism.
A similar discussion relates to the extent to which African journalism is grounded in
oral discourse, creativity, and human agency: Shaw (2009) argues that this presents a
contrast to Western journalism, while at the same time, Skjerdal (2011) nds no major
dierence between Ethiopian and Western journalism values in his investigation of the im-
plementation of a ve-year postdoctoral programme for journalism education in Ethiopia.
Still, other researchers conceptualise Indigenous journalism as having a role in cul-
tural preservation and community organisation (Cohen & McIntyre, 2019; McCallum
& Posetti, 2008; Meadows, 2009) or in language revitalisation (Chibuwe & Salawu,
2020; Cohen & McIntyre, 2019; Nwagbara, 2013; Skogerbø et al., 2019). Skogerbø and
colleagues (2019), for example, investigate how public service broadcasters in Norway
and Sweden see their role with regard to the protection and revitalisation of Sámi lan-
guages. They nd that a dilemma exists between the aim of language revitalisation and
promotion, and the need to produce journalism that is accessible to Sámi audiences.
The analytical focus of the material reviewed is on identifying dierences in the
function and practice of Indigenous journalism, rather than the extent to which these
variations are facilitated by technological innovation. However, technological develop-
ments also inuence how Indigenous journalism is developed. The design, diusion,
and use of technology is negotiated in sociotechnical networks. These negotiations
are not value neutral, and they can – and often do – reproduce structures of inequality.
Hess and Waller (2015), for example, point out that community journalism (including
Indigenous journalism) increasingly relies on networked infrastructures supplied by
global media companies such as Google, Facebook, and Apple. These companies are
not neutral players.
Furthermore, while Alia (2010) has stated that telephony is “language neutral”, and
Hanusch (2013) maintains that Indigenous journalism supports linguistic revitalisation,
the contemporary reality is more complicated. Journalists use mobile phones – however,
the interfaces of these phones are not always available in Indigenous languages (Ní
Bhroin, 2015a). In fact, the range of languages available is usually linked to the potential
size of the market for these languages (see also Lenihan, 2014). Technological aor-
dances therefore usually reect market interests at the expense of Indigenous languages
and culture. We therefore nd that the role and inuence of commercial organisations
in developing technologies that facilitate or constrain Indigenous journalism are not
suciently problematised in the research we have reviewed.
Political participation
Indigenous journalism is also considered to have a role in increasing the participation
and visibility of Indigenous communities in the public sphere (Gift et al., 2019; Hanusch,
2014a; Latimore et al., 2017; Tomaselli, 2003; Waller, 2010) and even in supporting self-
determination (Plaut, 2014, 2017; Skogerbø et al., 2019). The inuences of new tech-
nological norms are more closely investigated in research that explores these questions.

196
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
Gift and colleagues (2019), for example, nd that the Tonga people of Zimbabwe
– who have historically been marginalised in the public sphere – have adopted digital
media and increased their participation and visibility in the public sphere. The authors
argue that this has fostered the expression of new forms of citizenship, participatory
culture, and empowerment.
At the same time, participation in new media platforms is also inuenced by com-
mercial logics, including the consequences this has for the privacy and autonomy of
Indigenous communities. Mann and Daly (2019) nd, for example, that processes of
data colonisation that existed prior to the development of the Internet are increased and
perpetuated in Big Data practices. They argue that the ways in which data are gathered
about Indigenous people perpetuate domination and bring about enduring “digital co-
lonialism”.
Related to this – and echoing concerns about Big Data practices, privacy, and access
– Latimore, Nolan, Simons, and Khan (2017) propose that in order to understand how
power relations inuence the development of Indigenous journalism, we must look be-
yond theories of participation and deliberation and engage in more critical research that
focuses on the material and sociotechnical conguration of networked media. They argue
that such an analysis enables a reconnection of our understanding of democratic com-
munication with the material relations that structure it. In particular, they suggest that
such an approach could support the identication of how the interrelationship between
various elements of these assemblages might result in the amplication of particular
messages, while certain other aspects remain unheard.
Furthermore, in their analysis of a mainstream Australian radio programme about
rural life, Waller and colleagues (2020) nd that Indigenous voices and perspectives are
rarely included. As a result, they argue that the programme promotes a “rural imaginary”
that is driven by “settler common sense”. It thereby reinforces existing power rela-
tions that continue to marginalise Indigenous people. Similarly, M’Balla-Ndi’s (2017)
analysis of the production of journalism – both among the Indigenous Kanak and the
French communities in New Caledonia – does not support claims about social change,
but rather reects on how the production of journalism, including Indigenous journal-
ism, can serve to maintain existing power relations within and between communities.
The research in our sample indicates that colonial perspectives and “settler” mentalities
prevail and continue to inuence participation in the consumption and production of
Indigenous journalism in certain contexts (Kilgo & Harlow, 2019; Lang, 2015; M’Balla-
Ndi, 2017; Waller et al., 2020).
One key group of factors explored in this material which may facilitate participation
in Indigenous journalism are media institutional factors, including national media regu-
lation and funding mechanisms. However, assigning the responsibility for promoting
participation in Indigenous journalism to national governments may present a double-
edged sword. Governments may have some responsibility for fostering Indigenous
journalism, in particular in the context of righting the wrongs of colonisation and assimi-
lation processes (Hanusch, 2014a); empirical studies in our material nd, for example,
that Māori journalism is supported by government funding (Hanusch, 2014b). Several
television production companies and 21 radio stations are entirely funded by the state
in New Zealand, and these have had some success in promoting and preserving Māori
language and culture.

197
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
However, Skogerbø and colleagues (2019) also nd that it is ultimately the national
broadcasting institutions in Norway and Sweden which facilitate Sámi journalism that
make policy decisions about the allocation of resources. As a result, while it is benecial
for the Sámi community and for Sámi journalists to belong to these larger organisations
(see also Plaut, 2014, 2017), the situation renders the community dependent on the poli-
cies and priorities of these organisations and their initiatives (Alia, 2010; Markelin &
Husband, 2013; Skogerbø et al, 2019).
While the degree of social change that Indigenous journalism promises is paradig-
matic, particularly with regard to the potential for political participation, most of the
studies in our material do not present empirical evidence of signicant social change.
Conclusion
We set out to investigate how media and technological innovations are understood to
facilitate Indigenous journalism, in particular with regard to the role of Indigenous
journalism in bringing about social change. Based on a literature review, we nd that
research on this topic conceptualises Indigenous journalism as something that exists
in contrast or opposition to Western journalism. This normative and critical starting
point arises because of the extent to which many Indigenous communities have been
excluded, marginalised, or subject to racist portrayals in mainstream media. Indigenous
journalism is therefore understood as an opportunity to “talk back” and address these
historical problems, thereby promoting social change. However, as discussed, not all
Indigenous people share the experience of colonisation and marginalisation, and as
such, the implications of using this collective concept in this eld of research are often
not suciently addressed.
The recent “burgeoning” (Hokowhitu & Devadas, 2013) of Indigenous journalism is
furthermore quite often unproblematically attributed to innovations in media and com-
munication technologies, in particular the Internet, mobile technology, and social me-
dia. However, we nd that the extent to which these innovations are diused in specic
social and economic contexts, and how this in turn inuences the process of Indigenous
journalism, remains underexplored. We acknowledge that while media innovations
present opportunities for self-expression and participatory culture, these opportunities
alone will not lead to social change (see also Gift et al., 2019). Forms of engagement
that allow Indigenous communities to raise and frame issues of relevance to them, while
maintaining professional standards and respecting individual privacy and autonomy, are
equally important (see also Plaut, 2014, 2017; Vargas et al., 2020).
Furthermore, research within the eld of media innovations points to the fact that
legacy media companies are often wary of innovation, because they want to retain con-
trol over their share of the market and do not want to change existing power relations.
Global media corporations, which function according to commercial mandates, are
increasingly providing the infrastructure according to which Indigenous journalism is
being produced and consumed. The potential for the amplication of Indigenous voices
– which is understood to contribute to empowerment and social change – is thereby in-
creasingly inuenced by global commercial actors rather than political institutions. Our
analysis also indicates that this situation is not suciently problematised or explored in
research on Indigenous journalism.

198
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
A further signicant knowledge gap relates to the fact that community participation
and engagement is considered central to Indigenous journalism. At the same time, only
three of the studies in our material explore how audiences engage with, perceive, and
use this kind of journalism. We therefore know very little about the extent to which the
audiences or users of Indigenous journalism experience or appreciate it, or about how
it impacts their everyday lives.
Overall, we nd signicant knowledge gaps in this eld of research. We submit that
more critical analytical approaches are required to investigate how media innovations
might facilitate the potential of Indigenous journalism for social change.
References
Adeduntan, A. (2018). Truth, nothing but the performative truth. Journalism Studies, 19(12), 1712–1729.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2017.1299587
Alia, V. (2010). The new media nation: Indigenous peoples and global communication. Berghahn Books.
Belair-Gagnon, V., & Steinke, A. J. (2020). Capturing digital news innovation research in organizations,
1990–2018. Journalism Studies, 21(12), 1724–1743. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1789496
Berger, G. (2000). Grave new world? Democratic journalism enters the global twenty-rst century. Journalism
Studies, 1(1), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/146167000361186
Brooten, L. (2006). Political violence and journalism in a multiethnic state: A case study of Burma (Myan-
mar). Journal of Communication Inquiry, 30(4), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859906290841
Bruns, A. (2014). Media innovations, user innovations, societal innovations. The Journal of Media Innova-
tions, 1(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.5617/jmi.v1i1.827
Bull, T. (2002). Kunnskapspolitikk, forskningsetikk og det samiske samfunnet [Knowledge politics, research
ethics, and Sámi society]. In Samisk forskning og forskningsetikk [Sámi research and research ethics]
(pp. 6–21). The Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees. https://www.forskningsetikk.no/
ressurser/publikasjoner/samisk-forskning-og-forskningsetikk/
Burrows, E. (2018). Indigenous media producers’ perspectives on objectivity, balancing community re-
sponsibilities and journalistic obligations. Media, Culture & Society, 40(8), 1117–1134. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0163443718764807
Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. Polity Press.
Chibuwe, A., & Salawu, A. (2020). Training for English language or Indigenous language media journalism: A
decolonial critique of Zimbabwean journalism and media training institutions’ training practices. Journal
of African Media Studies, 12(2), 137–156. https://doi.org/10.1386/jams_00016_1
Cohen, M. S., & McIntyre, K. (2019). Local-language radio stations in Kenya: Helpful or harmful? African
Journalism Studies, 40(3), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/23743670.2020.1729830
da Silva, G. C., & Sanseverino, G. G. (2020). Business model innovation in news media: Fostering new
relationships to stimulate support from readers. Media and Communication, 8(2), 28–39. https://doi.
org/10.17645/mac.v8i2.2709
Day, P. (1990). The making of the New Zealand press: A study of the organizational and political concerns
of New Zealand newspaper controllers 1840–1880. Victoria University Press.
Deuze, M. (2005). What is journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalists reconsidered. Journal-
ism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 6(4), 442–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884905056815
Dogruel, L. (2013). Opening the black box: The conceptualising of media innovation. In T. Storsul, & A.
H. Krumsvik (Eds.), Media innovations: A multidisciplinary study of change (pp. 29–44). Nordicom,
University of Gothenburg.
Dreher, T., Waller, L., & McCallum, K. (2018). Disruption or transformation? Australian policymaking in the
face of Indigenous contestation. In E. Peeren, R. Celikates, J. de Kloet, & T. Poell (Eds.), Global cultures
of contestation: Mobility, sustainability, aesthetics & connectivity (pp. 215–240). Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63982-6_11
Ess, C. M. (2014). Editor’s introduction: Innovations in the newsroom – and beyond. The Journal of Media
Innovations, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.5617/jmi.v1i2.923
Fussey, P., & Roth, S. (2020). Digitizing sociology: Continuity and change in the internet era. Sociology,
54(4), 659–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038520918562
Gift, G., Last, A., & Deity, C. N. (2019). The Tonga people of Northern Zimbabwe: An encounter with digital
media. African Journalism Studies, 39(4), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/23743670.2018.1533487
Golding, P. (2018). New technologies, old questions: The enduring issues of communications research. Javnost
– The Public, 25(1–2), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2018.1418959

199
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
Goyanes, M., López-López, P. C., & Demeter, M. (2020). Social media in ecuador: Impact on journalism
practice and citizens’ understanding of public politics. Journalism Practice, 15(3), 366–382. https://doi.
org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1724180
Hanusch, F. (2013). Charting a theoretical framework for examining Indigenous journalism culture. Media
International Australia, 149(1), 82–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X1314900110
Hanusch, F. (2014a). Dimensions of Indigenous journalism culture: Exploring Māori news-making in
Aotearoa New Zealand. Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 15(8), 951–967. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1464884913495757
Hanusch, F. (2014b). Indigenous cultural values and journalism in the Asia-Pacic region: A brief history of
Māori journalism. Asian Journal of Communication, 24(4), 390–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/012929
86.2014.885538
Hanusch, F. (2015). Cultural forces in journalism: The impact of cultural values on Māori journalists’ pro-
fessional views. Journalism Studies, 16(2), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2013.859864
Hartley, J., & McKee, A. (2000). The Indigenous public sphere: The reporting and reception of aboriginal
issues in the Australian media. Oxford University Press.
Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (2002). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media.
Pantheon Books.
Hess, K., & Waller, L. (2015). Community journalism in Australia: A media power perspective. Community
Journalism, 4(1), 2–9. https://dro.deakin.edu.au/view/DU:30075759
Hokowhitu, B., & Devadas, V. (2013). Introduction: Fourth eye: The Indigenous mediascape in Aotearoa New
Zealand. In B. Hokowhitu, & V. Devadas (Eds.), The fourth eye: Māori Media in Aotearoa New Zealand
(pp. xv–1). University of Minnesota Press.
Ijäs, A. J. (2012). Samer i to norske nyhetsmedier: En undersøkelse av saker med samisk hovedfokus i Nordlys
og Dagsrevyen i perioden 1970–2000 [The Sámi in two Norwegian news media outlets: An investigation of
items with Sámi as their main focus in Nordlys and Dagsrevyen in the period 1970–2000]. Sámi allaskuvla.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York University Press.
Kannengießer, S. (2020). Fair media technologies: Innovative media devices for social change and the good
life. The Journal of Media Innovations, 6(1), 38–49. https://doi.org/10.5617/jomi.7832
Kilgo, D. K., & Harlow, S. (2019). Protests, media coverage, and a hierarchy of social struggle. The Interna-
tional Journal of Press/Politics, 24(4), 508–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161219853517
Koivula, M., Villi, M., & Sivunen, A. (2020). Creativity and innovation in technology-mediated journalistic
work: Mapping out Enablers and Constraints. Digital Journalism, 1–18. Ahead-of-print. https://doi.or
g/10.1080/21670811.2020.1788962
Krumsvik, A. H., Milan, S., Ní Bhroin, N., & Storsul, T. (2019). Making (sense of) media innovations. In
M. Deuze, & M. Prenger (Eds.), Making media: Production, practices, and professions (pp.193–206).
Amsterdam University Press.
Krøvel, R. (2017). Violence against Indigenous journalists in Colombia and Latin America. In U. Carlsson,
& R. Pöyhtäri (Eds.), The assault on journalism: Building knowledge to protect freedom of expression
(pp. 191–203). Nordicom, University of Gothenburg. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:norden:
org:diva-5068
Lang, M. J. (2015). Written out of their own story: The rhetorical colonialism of journalistic practice. Com-
munication Studies, 66(1), 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2013.867408
Latimore, J., Nolan, D., Simons, M., & Khan, E. (2017). Reassembling the Indigenous public sphere. Aus-
tralasian Journal of Information Systems, 21, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v21i0.1529
Lefkowich, M., Dennison, B., & Klein, P. (2019). Empowerment journalism – Commentary for special is-
sue of Journalism Studies. Journalism Studies, 20(12), 1803–1809. https://doi.org/10.1080/146167
0X.2019.1638294
Lenihan, A. (2014). Investigating language policy in social media: Translation practices on Facebook. In P.
Seargeant, & C. Tagg (Eds.), The language of social media: Identity and community on the internet (pp.
208–227). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137029317_10
Mann, M., & Daly, A. (2019). (Big) data and the north-in-south: Australia’s informational imperialism and
digital colonialism. Television & New Media, 20(4), 379–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418806091
Markelin, L., & Husband, C. (2013). Contemporary dynamics of Sámi media in the Nordic States. Media
International Australia, 149(1), 70–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X1314900109
M’Balla-Ndi, M. (2017). Division in the land of ‘the unspoken’: Examining journalistic practice in contem-
porary New Caledonia. MedieKultur: Journal of media and communication research, 33(62), 52–71.
https://doi.org/10.7146/mediekultur.v33i62.24431
McCallum, K., & Posetti, J. N. (2008). Researching journalism and diversity Australia: History and policy.
In F. Papandrea, & M. Armstrong (Eds.), Communications policy & research forum (pp. 109–129)).
Network Insight Pty Ltd.

200
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
McChesney, R. W., & Nichols, J. (2010). The death and life of American journalism: The media revolution
that will begin the world again (1st ed.). Nation Books.
Meadows, M. (2009). Electronic dreaming tracks: Indigenous community broadcasting in Australia. Develop-
ment in Practice, 19(4–5), 514–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520902866363
Muindi, B. (2018). Negotiating the balance between speed and credibility in deploying Twitter as journalistic
tool at the Daily Nation newspaper in Kenya. African Journalism Studies, 39(1), 111–128. https://doi.
org/10.1080/23743670.2018.1445654
Ní Bhroin, N. (2015a). Lost in space? Social media-innovation and minority language use [Doctoral disserta-
tion, University of Oslo, Norway]. https://www.duo.uio.no/handle/10852/52954
Ní Bhroin, N. (2015b). Social media-innovation: The case of Indigenous Tweets. The Journal of Media In-
novations, 2(1) 89–106. https://doi.org/10.5617/jmi.v2i1.974
Ní Bhroin, N., & Milan, S. (2020). Media innovation and social change: Introduction to the special issue. The
Journal of Media Innovations, 6(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.5617/jomi.7829
Nwagbara, G. U. (2013). Indigenous language news and the marginalization of some ethnic groups in the
Nigerian broadcast media. Studies of Tribes and Tribals, 11(2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/0972
639X.2013.11886677
Olsen, T. A. (2018). This word is (not?) very exciting: Considering intersectionality in Indigenous studies.
NORA – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, 26(3), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/0
8038740.2018.1493534
Plaut, S. (2014). Nation-building, not “resistance radio”. Nordicom Review, 35(1), 81–97. https://doi.
org/10.2478/nor-2014-0006
Plaut, S. (2017). Reshaping the borders of journalism: Lessons learned from transnational peoples’ journalism.
Journalism Practice, 11(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2015.1092391
Rendueles, C., & Sádaba, I. (2019). Digitalización y cambio social: De las expectativas apocalípticas a la
tecnopolítica del presente [Digitalisation and social change: From apocalyptic expectations to the tech-
nopolitics of the present.] Cuadernos de Relaciones Laborales, 37(2), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.5209/
crla.66041
Ross, T. (2017). Rethinking journalism and culture: An examination of how Pacic audiences evaluate ethnic
media. Journalism Studies, 18(12), 1559–1575. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1146626
Sand, S. A. (2019). Indigenous television for the majority: Analyzing NRK Sápmi’s Muitte Mu (Remember
Me). Television & New Media, 22(5), 501–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476419857203
Shaw, I. S. (2009). Towards an African journalism model: A critical historical perspective. International Com-
munication Gazette, 71(6), 491–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048509339792
Skjerdal, T. S. (2011). Teaching journalism or teaching African journalism? Experiences from foreign involve-
ment in a journalism programme in Ethiopia. Global Media Journal African Edition, 5(1). https://doi.
org/10.5789/5-1-56
Skogerbø, E. (2000). Samiske medier: Innhold, bruk og rammevilkår [Sámi media: Content, use, and
framework conditions]. University of Oslo. https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/27224/
Samiskexmedier_2000.pdf?sequence=1
Skogerbø, E., Josefsen, E., & Fjellström, A.-M. (2019). Indigenous political journalism in the Norwegian
and Swedish public service broadcasters. Journalism Studies, 20(7), 991–1008. https://doi.org/10.108
0/1461670X.2018.1477550
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. Zed Books/University
of Otago Press.
Stewart, H., Meadows, M., Bowman, L., van Vuuren, K., & Mulligan, P. (2010). Indigenous voice: A work-
integrated learning case study in journalism education. Australian Journalism Review, 32(2), 59–72.
Su, C. (2019). An alternative chronicle of natural disaster: Social justice journalism in Taiwan. International
Journal of Communication, 13, 3321–3340.
Sweet, M., Pearson, L., & Dudgeon, P. (2013). @Indigenousx: A case study of community-led innovation in digi-
tal media. Media International Australia, 149(1), 104–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X1314900112
Tallent, R. J., & Dingman, R. S. (2011). Cherokee independent press act of 2000. Journal of Communication
Inquiry, 35(3), 252–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859911413468
Todorova, M. S. (2016). Co-created learning: Decolonizing journalism education in Canada. Canadian Journal
of Communication, 41(4), 673–692. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2016v41n4a2970
Tomaselli, K. G. (2003). ‘Our culture’ vs ‘foreign culture’: An essay on ontological and professional is-
sues in African journalism. International Communication Gazette, 65(6), 427–441. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0016549203065006001
United Nations. (2004). The concept of Indigenous peoples: Background paper prepared by the Secretariat
of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. United Nations. https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpi/
documents/workshop_data_background.doc

201
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Helsper, E. J. (2015). The third-level digital divide: Who benets most from
being online? In L. Robinson, S. R. Cotten, J. Schulz, T. M. Hale, & A. Williams (Eds.), Studies in
media and communications (pp. 29–52). Emerald Group Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2050-
206020150000010002
Vargas, C., Browne, J., Hardy, T., Moore, E., Vally, H., & Gleeson, D. (2020). Coverage of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander nutrition in the Koori Mail. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health,
44(3), 180–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12980
Waller, L. (2010). Indigenous research ethics: New modes of information gathering and storytelling in journal-
ism. Australian Journalism Review, 32(2), 19–31.
Waller, L., Dreher, T., & McCallum, K. (2015). The listening key: Unlocking the democratic poten-
tial of Indigenous participatory media. Media International Australia, 154(1), 57–66. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1329878X1515400109
Waller, L., Mesikämmen, E., & Burkett, B. (2020). Rural radio and the everyday politics of settlement on
Indigenous land. Media, Culture & Society, 42(6), 805–822. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443719876620
Walter, M., & Andersen, C. (2013). Indigenous statistics: A quantitative research methodology. Left Coast
Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315426570
World Bank. (2021). Indigenous peoples. Retrieved September 23, 2021, from https://www.worldbank.org/
en/topic/indigenouspeoples

202
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
Appendix 1
Table A1 Overview of empirical material
Method Reference Focus/Continent
case study Couldry, N., & Dreher, T. (2007). Globalization and the
public sphere: Exploring the space of community media
in Sydney. Global Media and Communication, 3(1),
79–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766507074360
Community media/Austra-
lia and Oceania
Hachten, W. A. (1968). The training of African Journa-
lists. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands), 14(2), 101–108.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001654926801400205
Journalism/Africa
Jenks, J. (2016). The scramble for African media: The
British government, Reuters, and Thomson in the
1960s. American Journalism, 33(1), 2–19. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08821127.2015.1134972
African media
Latimore, J., Nolan, D., Simons, M., & Khan, E. (2017).
Reassembling the Indigenous public sphere. Australa-
sian Journal of Information Systems, 21, 1–15. https://
doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v21i0.1529
Indigenous app/Australia
and Oceania
Lefkowich, M., Dennison, B., & Klein, P. (2019). Empo-
werment journalism – Commentary for special issue of
Journalism Studies. Journalism Studies, 20(12), 1803–
1809. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2019.1638294
Empowerment journalism/
Global
Mann, M., & Daly, A. (2019). (Big) data and the north-in-
south: Australia’s informational imperialism and digital
colonialism. Television & New Media, 20(4), 379–395.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418806091
Digital colonialism/Austra-
lia and Oceania
Martin, J. (2018). Writing Aboriginality: The portrayal
of Indigenous people in Australia’s Walkley-Award-
winning features. Literary Journalism Studies, 10(1),
8-19. https://ialjs.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/
Indigenous-LJ-8-69.pdf
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
Skjerdal, T. S. (2011). Teaching journalism or teach-
ing African journalism? Experiences from foreign
involvement in a journalism programme in Ethiopia.
Global Media Journal African Edition, 5(1). https://doi.
org/10.5789/5-1-56
African journalism
Tallent, R. J., & Dingman, R. S. (2011). Cherokee
independent press act of 2000. Journal of Com-
munication Inquiry, 35(3), 252–274. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0196859911413468
Indigenous journalism/
North America

203
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
interviews Burrows, E. (2018). Indigenous media producers’
perspectives on objectivity, balancing community
responsibilities and journalistic obligations. Media,
Culture & Society, 40(8), 1117–1134. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0163443718764807
Indigenous media/Global
Chibuwe, A., & Salawu, A. (2020). Training for English
language or Indigenous language media journalism:
A decolonial critique of Zimbabwean journalism and
media training institutions’ training practices. Journal
of African Media Studies, 12(2), 137–156. https://doi.
org/10.1386/jams_00016_1
Indigenous journalism/
Africa
Cohen, M. S., & McIntyre, K. (2019). Local-language
radio stations in Kenya: Helpful or harmful? African
Journalism Studies, 40(3), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.108
0/23743670.2020.1729830
African journalism
Goyanes, M., López-López, P. C., & Demeter, M. (2020).
Social media in Ecuador: Impact on journalism practice
and citizens’ understanding of public politics. Journa-
lism Practice, 15(3), 366–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/1
7512786.2020.1724180
Indigenous journalism/
South America
Hanusch, F. (2015). Cultural forces in journalism: The
impact of cultural values on Māori journalists’ profes-
sional views. Journalism Studies, 16(2), 191–206.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2013.859864
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
Hanusch, F. (2014b). Dimensions of Indigenous
journalism culture: Exploring Māori news-making
in Aotearoa New Zealand. Journalism: Theory,
Practice & Criticism, 15(8), 951–967. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1464884913495757
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
Hanusch, F., & Uppal, C. (2015). Combining detached
watchdog journalism with development ideals: An
exploration of Fijian journalism culture. International
Communication Gazette, 77(6), 557–576. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1748048515597873
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
Plaut, S. (2014). Nation-building, not “resistance
radio”. Nordicom Review, 35(1), 81–97. https://doi.
org/10.2478/nor-2014-0006
Indigenous journalism/
Europe
Ross, T. (2017). Rethinking journalism and culture: An
examination of how Pacific audiences evaluate ethnic
media. Journalism Studies, 18(12), 1559–1575. https://
doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1146626
Pacific journalism/Australia
and Oceania
comparative
interviews
Skogerbø, E., Josefsen, E., & Fjellström, A.-M. (2019).
Indigenous political journalism in the Norwegian and
Swedish public service broadcasters. Journalism
Studies, 20(7), 991–1008. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461
670X.2018.1477550
Indigenous journalism/
Europe
focus groups Meadows, M. (2009). Electronic dreaming tracks:
Indigenous community broadcasting in Australia.
Development in Practice, 19(4–5), 514–524. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09614520902866363
Indigenous community
broadcasting/ Australia
and Oceania
Ross, T. (2019). Pulled two ways: Norms of ‘Pacific-
ness’ and journalism in New Zealand’s Pacific news
media. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 40(6), 649–664.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07256868.2019.1675616
News media/ Australia and
Oceania

204
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
observation/
interview/
survey
Adeduntan, A. (2018). Truth, nothing but the perfor-
mative truth. Journalism Studies, 19(12), 1712–1729.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2017.1299587
Indigenous journalism/
Africa
archival/
participant
observation/
interviews
M’Balla-Ndi, M. (2017). Division in the land of ‘the
unspoken’: Examining journalistic practice in contem-
porary New Caledonia. MedieKultur: Journal of media
and communication research, 33(62), 52–71. https://
doi.org/10.7146/mediekultur.v33i62.24431.
Indigenous journalism/
North America
interviews/
primary source
documents
Plaut, S. (2017). Reshaping the borders of journalism:
Lessons learned from transnational peoples’ journa-
lism. Journalism Practice, 11(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/1
0.1080/17512786.2015.1092391
Indigenous journalism/
Europe
observation Stewart, H., Meadows, M., Bowman, L., van Vuuren,
K., & Mulligan, P. (2010). Indigenous voice: A work-
integrated learning case study in journalism education.
Australian Journalism Review, 32(2), 59–72.
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
multi-sited
ethnography
Brooten, L. (2006). Political violence and journalism in
a multiethnic state: A case study of Burma (Myanmar).
Journal of Communication Inquiry, 30(4), 354–373.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859906290841
Political journalism/Asia
content
analysis
Calvi, P. (2018). Reporting on Indigenous issues: The
extractive matrix of journalism vis-á-vis native Latin
Americans. Literary Journalism Studies, 10(1), 46–69.
Indigenous journalism/
South America
Gift, G., Last, A., & Deity, C. N. (2019). The Tonga
people of Northern Zimbabwe: An encounter with digi-
tal media. African Journalism Studies, 39(4), 91–108.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23743670.2018.1533487
Digital media/Africa
Kilgo, D. K., & Harlow, S. (2019). Protests, media
coverage, and a hierarchy of social struggle. The
International Journal of Press/Politics, 24(4), 508–530.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161219853517
US Journalism/North
America
Lang, M. J. (2015). Written out of their own story: The
rhetorical colonialism of journalistic practice. Communi-
cation Studies, 66(1), 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/1
0510974.2013.867408
Indigenous journalism/
North America
Todorova, M. S. (2016). Co-created learning: Deco-
lonizing journalism education in Canada. Canadian
Journal of Communication, 41(4), 673–692. https://doi.
org/10.22230/cjc.2016v41n4a2970
Indigenous journalism/
North America
Waller, L., Mesikämmen, E., & Burkett, B. (2020). Rural
radio and the everyday politics of settlement on Indi-
genous land. Media, Culture & Society, 42(6), 805–822.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443719876620
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
content and
framing
analysis
Browne, J., Gleeson, D., Adams, K., Atkinson, P., &
Hayes, R. (2018). Coverage of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander nutrition in major Australian news-
papers, 1996–2015. Australian and New Zealand
Journal of Public Health, 42(3), 277–283. https://doi.
org/10.1111/1753-6405.12790
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
Vargas, C., Browne, J., Hardy, T., Moore, E., Vally, H., &
Gleeson, D. (2020). Coverage of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander nutrition in the Koori Mail. Australian and
New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 44(3), 180–185.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12980
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania

205
Indigenous journalism, media innovation, and social change
historical/
content
analysis
Hanusch, F. (2014a). Dimensions of Indigenous
journalism culture: Exploring Māori news-making
in Aotearoa New Zealand. Journalism: Theory,
Practice & Criticism, 15(8), 951–967. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1464884913495757
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
content
analysis/
survey
Nwagbara, G. U. (2013). Indigenous language news
and the marginalization of some ethnic groups in
the Nigerian broadcast media. Studies of Tribes and
Tribals, 11(2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/09726
39X.2013.11886677
Indigenous journalism/
Africa
content/
production
analysis
Su, C. (2019). An alternative chronicle of natural disas-
ter: Social justice journalism in Taiwan. International
Journal of Communication, 13, 3321–3340.
Social justice journalism/
Asia

206
Niamh Ní Bhroin, Stine Sand, & Torkel Rasmussen
Appendix 2
Table A2 Overview of theoretical material
Reference Focus/Continent
Berger G. (2002). Theorizing the media—Democracy relationship in South-
ern Africa. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands), 64(1), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1
177/17480485020640010201
Media and democracy/
Africa
Hanusch, F. (2014b). Indigenous cultural values and journalism in the
Asia-Pacific region: a brief history of Māori journalism, Asian Journal of
Communication, 24(4), 390–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2014.
885538
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
Hanusch F. (2013). Charting a theoretical framework for examining Indi-
genous journalism culture. Media International Australia, 149(1), 82–91.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X1314900110
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
Hess, K., & Waller, L. (2015). Community journalism in Australia: A media
power perspective, Community Journalism, 4(1), 2–9. https://dro.deakin.
edu.au/view/DU:30075759
Community journalism/
Australia and Oceania
James, S. L. (1990). Development of Indigenous journalism and broadcast
formats: Curricular implications for communication studies in Africa. Afri-
can Media Review, 4(1), 1–14. https://n2t.net/ark:/85335/m59p2xh7n
Indigenous journalism /
Africa
Nwagbara, G. U. (2013). Indigenous language news and the marginali-
zation of some ethnic groups in the Nigerian broadcast media. Studies
of Tribes and Tribals, 11(2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/09726
39X.2013.11886677
Indigenous language
news/Africa
Reynolds, B. (2018). Indigenous literary journalism, saturation reporting,
and the aesthetics of experience. Literary Journalism Studies, 10(1),37–46.
Indigenous literary journa-
lism/Global
Shaw I. S. (2009). Towards an African journalism model: A critical historical
perspective. International Communication Gazette, 71(6), 491–510. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1748048509339792
African journalism/Africa
Skjerdal T. S. (2012). The three alternative journalisms of Africa.
International Communication Gazette, 74(7), 636–654. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1748048512458559
African journalism/Africa
Waller, L. (2010). Indigenous research ethics: New modes of information
gathering and storytelling in journalism. Australian Journalism Review,
32(2), 19–31.
Indigenous journalism/
Australia and Oceania
© 2021 Respective authors. This is an Open Access work licensed under the terms of the Crea-
tive Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public licence (CC
BY-NC-ND 4.0). To view a copy of the licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/