Abstract
In this work, Andrew Chadwick asserts that we must leave the traditional understanding of media—with its boundaries, norms, and hierarchies—behind and move to a new understanding of media systems that captures the interactions between officeholders, journalists, bloggers, broadcasters, and the public. He dubs the latter as a “hybrid media system.” A hybrid media system is the integration of traditional and new media platforms and actors to communicate a message in a more effective and meaningful way.
This new theoretical and conceptual approach to mass media is needed due to the Internet expanding media beyond principally television, newspapers, and radio. Today, hard copy newspapers have websites, Facebook pages, and Twitter feeds that use audio and video. Television anchors and news shows have affiliated websites and blogs. As Chadwick demonstrates, content originating on the web can easily crossover to be reported on television and vice versa. For example, professional journalists and broadcasters gather information and content from social media and bloggers. Meanwhile, bloggers can take traditional new reports and create online news. This crossover or integration is the essence of a hybrid media system.
Definition and Usage Hybrid Media
In Chapter 1, Chadwick offers the reader a definition and application of hybridization in the social sciences, political communications, and mass media. A simple definition of “hybrid”: something that combines or mixes the best features of two or more elements or sources to achieve an objective. He argues that hybrid thinking leads scholars from various disciplines to new and different research questions, as it allows one to examine processes and systems from a different angle. Indeed, the concept of hybridization has been applied to studies of regime change, institutional transitions, power relations, organizational structures, and cultural shifts. Hybrid thinking can be applied to the changing (and expanding) nature of media offerings, such as hard and soft news, and the digitization of the media process and profession. Throughout the text, Chadwick focuses on three core themes such as power relationships among actors in the media arena, the media system or structure, and media logic.
History of Hybrid Media
The takeaway from Chapter 2 can easily be summarized in a few words: “media hybridization is not new.” Since the dawn of oral and print media, the mixture of media and communications technologies has resulted in new forms of expression. As technology advances, so does media. Chadwick recounts the historical path of media hybridization from printed pamphlets and books, to recorded sound and digital audio, and to telephone and broadcast. As newer, more advanced technology emerged, media integration is evident whereby a new mode of media borrows from an older mode—ultimately mixing. Chadwick provides the examples of national television networks building on the long-distance telephone infrastructure and then computer networks building on the television broadcast structure.
In Chapter 3, Chadwick brings the reader to the current mediascape in Britain and the United States, discussing the decline of hard copy newspapers and the rise of online news. In response to the digital era, news organizations have moved some content online, turning to affiliated websites, social media, blogs, message boards, and YouTube. As a result, the professional newsroom has changed. For instance, some journalistic and editorial staff have been replaced by professional bloggers, online content is more frequently tapped, and journalistic norms and routines have relaxed. Chadwick is quick to note that traditional media still exists and in some ways still dominate in the media world, as the core business of newspapers, television, and radio remains the same, but boundaries between old and new media have become crossed or hybridized.
Bullygate and the Prime Minister Debate
In Chapter 4, Chadwick asserts that the concept of “news cycle” has become outmoded with hybridization and should be replaced with “political information cycle.” He defines political information cycles as “assemblages” of old and new media’s actors, norms, and structures when reporting news and information. To illustrate, Chadwick provides a narrative of the Britain’s “Bullygate” scandal as well as Britain’s first live, televised Prime Minister debate in 2010. For anyone following these events, Chadwick offers little new information, as he is simply drawing upon his own observations, media reports, and online material. Here, three main conclusions can be drawn: First, elite and non-elite actors from print, broadcast, and online outlets can interact (or not interact) to construct and produce political news. Second, online news, particularly blogs and social media, can serve as a corrective force to mainstream news reports, offering more investigative material, context, and counterpoints. Third, events can be covered in real time to the extent that actors can shape the mediascape as the event unfolds. These conclusions will not surprise new media scholars, as the Internet’s influence on political news coverage has long been documented.
WikiLeaks
In Chapter 5, Chadwick offers a discussion of how WikiLeaks contributes to the hybrid media system. WikiLeaks is best known as a whistle-blower, releasing confidential documents online to a broad audience. Midway through the text, Chadwick’s WikiLeaks discussion seems oddly inserted, as no other profit or nonprofit media sources, such as FactCheck or OpenSecrets, garner specific analysis in the book. Yet, here, Chadwick argues that the logic of WikiLeaks is the essence of “media hybridization,” as both journalists and amateurs are providing information, journalistic norms are relaxed but recognized (the authenticity of sources is not assumed), and, most important, it engages the traditional media. Despite WikiLeaks’ influence on political news, Chadwick emphasizes that mainstream media still rules, suggesting that WikiLeaks would have little impact without the help of professional media. In his view, WikiLeaks is the quintessential hybrid, but he dubs it as “disruptive” to the mediascape and “not-quite-journalism.” Previously, it seemed Chadwick championed the hybrid media system, but now he hints that hybridization is “bad” for professional journalism.
Obama’s Campaign Model
In Chapters 6 and 7, Chadwick backtracks to the 2008 U.S. presidential campaigns. Similar to the British events, Chadwick offers little new insight about hybrid media to anyone who watched the 2008 campaign. His interpretation focuses on the Obama campaign’s seamless integration of old and new media, which has been discussed at length in other books and articles (e.g., Clayton, 2010; Hendricks & Denton, 2010; Hendricks & Kaid, 2010; Johnson, 2009; Sabato, 2009). It is well known that Obama’s campaign effectively used digital outlets, such as social networks, blogs, e-mails, and online videos, to mobilize, connect, and inform users right alongside traditional campaign tactics, such as canvassing, television ads and interviews, and radio shows. The takeaway is simple: The White House cannot be won using the Internet alone. Readers seeking another descriptive summary of new media’s role in the 2008 U.S. presidential campaigns will find Chapters 6 and 7 useful.
Interviewing Media Actors
Chapters 8 and 9 are the heart of the volume. Here, Chadwick presents the results of informal interviews he conducted with British media actors from a range of political and media settings. Those seeking a comparison between British and American media actors will be disappointed, however, as only those from Britain are interviewed. Despite this limitation, these interviews shed light on the hybrid media system’s inner-workings, particularly how newsmaking and journalistic norms have evolved. While a structured presentation of interview responses would have been more useful, many important observations are gleaned. For example, first, old and new media are clearly competing. Second, new media are strategically used in many ways—from bloggers adding information to an evolving television story to a broadcaster building a personalized web presence on Twitter. Third, bloggers and amateurs play a key role in newsgathering and in-depth investigative reporting, both informally and formally collaborating with broadcast and print journalists. Fourth, online user comments are used to gauge audience reaction to both offline and online news. Here, Chadwick pulls back the curtain, revealing that old and new media actors are interacting to make news.
Conclusion
Overall, Chadwick shows the reader that the neat boundaries once separating newspapers, broadcast, and telecommunications are not disappearing but are rather merging into a hybrid system. Throughout the text, his implications for professional media organizations and political elites are obvious: adapt to new media or fail. The implications of media hybridization for the citizenry, however, are largely ignored in this volume. As a result, it is unclear if the citizenry is more politically informed and engaged in a hybrid media system.
In general, this book is valuable for communication and media scholars and practitioners, as it provides a “behind-the-scenes” look at hybrid media. In the college-classroom, there is a variety of introductory new media textbooks that already cover the content discussed in Chadwick’s early chapters. In addition, the descriptive summary of the British and U.S. political events may be repetitive content on some course syllabi. Courses will benefit largely from the interviews with editors, broadcasters, journalists, campaign officials, and bloggers in the last few chapters. Thus, this book will best serve as an effective supplementary text, albeit not a main one.