Journalism academics around the world face the challenge of defining their
work in terms of academic research outcomes. They are under pressure
to account for the research value of journalistic activity. This article has
presented a model for how journalism practitioner-academics can combine
the production of in-depth high-quality journalism with theoretical analysis that confirms its standing as legitimate academic research. The Ph.D. case
study used practice-related research methodology as the framework to extract
theory from practice. Following Candy’s distinction between practice-led and
practice-based research (2006: 1) the fieldwork interviews with eminent radio
documentary producers were examples of practice-led research – through
5. One of the examiners
of the doctoral thesis
pointed out that
[o]pportunities
for working radio
producers to reflect
on their practice
are indeed rare …,
and descriptions
and analyses of
their work will be
very valuable, with
genuine practical
application.
Although this
thesis has been
written in an
academic context, I
believe it would be
easily read by and
of great interest to
radio producers,
who will appreciate
the value of
‘uncovering
knowledge
embedded in
practice’.
RJ_12.1&2_Lindgren_169-182.indd 178 9/24/15 3:30:07 PM
Radio journalism as research – a Ph.D. model
179
which the researcher conducted research on practice. This made it possible to
derive theory from their practice and thereby supplement the scant literature
on the radio documentary. The practical component of the Ph.D., the radio
documentary itself exemplified Candy’s practice-based research, which can be
described as research through practice. The creative production contributed to
knowledge in and of itself through the meticulous research process required
to tell the history of asbestos. In addition, the producer’s self-reflective account
of the production process illustrates the theory embedded in practice. To fully
understand the complex processes of journalism practice it was necessary
to borrow analytical frameworks from other disciplines. The study showed
the relevance of ‘mixing and matching’ a range of approaches to collecting,
analysing and presenting data reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of journalism research.
In summary, the practice-based doctoral study outlined in this article was
a three-step investigation into the theory and practice of radio documentary
production. It presented an analytical model for conceptualizing journalistic
practice as research; a model that was both transparent and replicable:
1. The first step was producing the radio documentary Deadly Dust
commissioned by the ABC whilst keeping a detailed fieldwork journal
capturing the production process as it happened. The extensive archival
research undertaken to produce the documentary was also documented
and captured in a full ring-binder.
2. In the second step primary data about documentary production was
collected through interviews with renowned practitioners reflecting on
their own work. The interviews contributed new knowledge to the underresearched field of radio documentary practice.
3. In the third and final step of the study, the production of the radio documentary was revisited, and the themes extracted from the fieldwork interviews combined with my own reflections on practice, were applied to
the production of Deadly Dust thereby offering a much-needed analytical
framework to use for evaluation and analysis of the practice of radio documentary production.
The result was a study on journalism practice combining an analytical
dissertation with a radio production thereby becoming an exemplar for
practice-related research, which can be useful for other practitioner-academics
as a framework for their research.