VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL

Research plan
Twitter in the newsroom: an analysis of professional guidelines amongst Flemish journalists.
Supervisor: Dr. Ike Picone
Co-supervisor: Mr. Sander Spek
Yannick Van Winkel 9-12-2011

This research plan must ensure that the research is put into practice, delineated and planned. The research plan must put the research into context and set out and justify the choices made.

Research plan
1. What?
This part, the first of the research plan, contains an explanation and a first introduction into the topic, the main issues and research questions (what I want to research) and an explanation of the issues. Like the title explains already, Im going to do my Master thesis about the phenomenon Twitter, an online social networking and micro blogging service that enables its users to send and read text-based posts of up to 140 characters, informally known as tweets, and its relation to the news world, especially when it comes to the deontology of professional journalists in Flanders and their everyday use of this online daylong brainstorming session. The main goal of this Master thesis is to investigate if there are, written or unwritten, guidelines or directives for professional journalists in Flanders (whether they work for the written press, radio or television) imposed by their superiors when it comes to their use of Twitter related to news and whether or not they take them in account or not. Thats the key question. Also an important (research) question is if there are any differences between the journalists and the editorial staff of different media distributors (press, radio, TV) and their daily use of Twitter in terms of news and the associated (or not associated) deontology that comes with the use of it. Also the impact on the news which is made by journalists using Twitter will shortly be described and examined. That is, in a nutshell, the main thought behind my whole thesis. To make you aware a little bit more what I precisely want to achieve, Ill sum up some more close-related subjects and research questions which are part of the main thought that I chose for the thesis in a very broad sense. Is Twitter a daily tool in the profession as a journalist/news editor? Why is it used/why not? How do you use it? Wherefore? How frequently? Are there any ethics and/or deontology taken into account when it comes to use of Twitter in the newsroom? If so, what precisely is organized to make sure that the social network is used in a responsible way? Is there any major mistakes/inaccuracies/blunders/miscomprehension in news making made because of Twitter? Are resources checked sufficient enough when using Twitter to make news? Isnt there a trend of blindly accepting whats appears on Twitter? Twitter and the reliability? Relation with the interactivity of Twitter, the back and forth game with the ordinary user. Relation Twitter and the marketing of the medium? Doesnt the news get to sensational to reach more readers and advertisers? Is there still a place for investigative reporting in a world of Twitter and its continuous flow of information? Own experience with all these aforementioned topics?

Yannick Van Winkel rolnr. 100986 Master of Science in Communication Studies New Media and Society in Europe

Research plan
2. Why?
The second part includes the premise, the arguments and the social and scientific relevance of the research (why do I want to research this matter?). As I have noticed already from the literature Ive been reading related to the writing of my Master thesis, Ive noticed there has been done quite a lot of research and writing already when it comes to the relation Twitter-journalism/news. What I didnt found yet is a thorough investigation between Twitter and the deontology/rules/ethics in the use in the professional newsroom of this social networking service, especially not when it comes to the Flemish news landscape. Twitter also became a daily routine in many peoples lives, some die-hards Twitter fans are tweeting from when they get up in the morning till they go to sleep, all day long. We also noticed that in many TV-shows, above the news and current affairs programs (for example Terzake or Reyers Laat) encourage their followers on Twitter to interact online with the debates broadcasted with Tweets. Every citizen is in that way able to give their own opinion when it comes to every part of the topicality of that day. But is this necessarily a good thing?

3. Theory
This part focuses on the theoretical part of the Master thesis to be made: the theoretical perspective, how will I approach this research from a theoretical viewpoint (paradigms, current thinking, approaches). I noticed from the reading that I did that there are a thousand and one different theories and approaches. Include the theories and paradigms of authors like A. Bruns (who works with a network theory), J. Rosen and J. Jardis are all very interesting to take into account but above all they are very different in their approach and goal. I probably take one (or more or a combination) of these theories and their techniques as a starting point. As you can see I didnt made my mind up yet completely when it comes to the operationalization of theoretical perspective, but this wont take a long time anymore to decide.

4. How?
The fourth part is about which kind of methods that Im going to use to get to splendid research. Thus, the methodology, an explanation and the rationale for using a certain methodology (how will I go about the research from a methodological viewpoint?). Im going to use more than likely the methodological technique of the semi-structural depth or extended interview. Im going to interview between 15 and 25 professional journalists in Flanders, active in all domains of the news making world (either printed press, radio or television) and, naturally, active on Twitter. Im going to work
Yannick Van Winkel rolnr. 100986 Master of Science in Communication Studies New Media and Society in Europe

Research plan
with a very long topic list, a file with a bunch of clear questions; this is the touchable demand material. All these questions are going to be classified in so-called theme lists. Each of these theme lists focuses on a different part of an answer of the key question, because there are of course a whole lot of ways of answering this question and a lot of things that play an important role with use of Twitter by journalists. The focus on different of theme-lists could be for example: work pace, checking sources, influence use ability, relationship advertising, user interaction, formal rules in the newsroom, etc. If the person whos being interviewed, for example, jumps from answering questions from theme list 2 to theme list 5 and then back to theme list 4 when he starts to rattle on, I can, afterwards when I listen to the recorded interview again, categorize everything that he/she has said into the right list or create new theme lists which of I previously didnt thought of. After the processing of all this information, I can, hopefully, get to an interesting and clear result, a closing answer to the key question and a defined conclusion.

5. Structure
Whats my actual thesis going to look like, in a literal way. Whats going to be explained first chronologically, hows the lay-out going to be. In brief, the structural framework for the research (preliminary table of contents). My preliminary table of contents: 1. Introduction 2. Abstract 3. Outline: an overview of the mix of academic literature (about new media, the digital revolution, Twitter, the Flemish journalistic landscape and so on), a part about deontology and guidelines for journalists in a broad sense, change through the years, impact, mistakes when using Twitter, 4. Methodology: how did I organized my research, how did I proceeded the academic fieldwork, which methodology of which authors inspired me and which of them did I taken into account. A detailed explanation about how I managed to get to the result. Heres also the part of the thesis where the key question and the research questions are widely described. 5. Results: A detailed overview of all the partly findings and results and main attentions I discovered through the research and interviews. A demonstration of the important findings. 6. Conclusion: the most important part of the whole Master thesis: what is the main and actual conclusion of this Master Thesis? 7. Appendix: overview of the people interviewed, different broadcasters, 8. Outroduction: What did we learn? Also a little part of musings where the facts in this conclusion can lead to in the future. 9. Attachments: bibliography, question and topic lists, theme lists, the recorded interviews, the research plan, other.

Yannick Van Winkel rolnr. 100986 Master of Science in Communication Studies New Media and Society in Europe

Research plan
6. When?
A brief time mapping of the development of the thesis, the planning schedule for the research. November-December-January: look up and read all the literature which is going to be used and decide which methodology to use. Contact possible journalists to interview. Talk with supervisors. February-March: do the interviews, process and classify the data received. Discuss with supervisors. March-April: After processing, design the result with the help of all the findings, make up the conclusion in my mind. Discuss with supervisors. April-May: write out everything in detail till the Master thesis is finished. Review with supervisors. 18th of May: Hand in Master thesis!

7. Literature
This last part contains a temporary list of literature used in the future thesis. Im going to keep this part open till the 24th of December, when we have to hand in the annotated bibliography. The list is too long to put it already in the research plan. I Hope thats allowable.

Yannick Van Winkel rolnr. 100986 Master of Science in Communication Studies New Media and Society in Europe