In the article "Overcoming 'Physics Envy'", Clarke and Primo cite an economist for his ideas about why people feel the need to do things using the same methods and strategies in order to compete. "If you don’t move to a central location but your opponent does, your opponent will nab those voters (customers)." (Downs,1950) I can see the reasoning behind these ideas, but at the same time it's the differences that count. If there is nothing to distinguish one thing from something else, then there is no purpose in it's existence. The beauty of a symphony isn't found in unison, but harmony.
It's important that multiple avenues of research are used/understood because, like people, no two are identical. Each provides a unique perspective and family of insights that might convey information to a different group of people. As long as it serves a purpose, any research, regardless of it's similarity to the hard sciences, is valuable and worthwhile.
A few journal articles that caught my attention:
Journalism Studies: The Impact of Technology on Journalism
Journalism and Mass Communications Quarterly: Individual and Routine Forces in Gatekeeping
No comments:
Post a Comment