Chair: Professor Risto Kunelius, University of Tampere, Finland
Professor Risto Kunelius, has an introduction before journalists and researchers share their views on innovation journalism. He states that journalism is defined by social, political scientists and not by journalists and political journalism varies depending on the political system (e.g. American vs. Finnish) He says developing national innovation ecosystem is crucial for the survival of nation and Innovativeness and creativity are the key for our national survival in Nordic countries. He argues that we need new kinds of interfaces in this new ecosystem that is also changing journalism.
Vilma Luoma-aho, Senior researcher, University of Jyväskylä, Finland
She says the ecosystem needs good relations, god funding and attention next to researchers, development people and application people. She suggests that innovation journalist should be T shaped people: broad knowledge in one area, cover deeply but communicative between sectors. They should go in different directions to feed the content.
Anu Partanen, Freelance journalist, US
She is sharing her experience in USA and compares journalism in USA and in Finland. There is paranoia in Finland that journalists should protect their integrity whereas in USA they have insiders in the system.
She defines Innovation journalism: describing solutions that help to understand. As a journalist she is trying to contribute to the solutions and ponders on the role of journalist is solving problems.
She suggests: Innovation will happen as the company’s business plan. Narrow way of looking at what companies are doing is practical. As for relations between journalists and others – journalist being part of making innovation happen, she is not to identify with company.
Jyrki Alkio, Journalist, Talouselämä, Finland
He thinks the role of the journalist in the process is the challenge. They should accept the importance of the question and see the journalism agenda. Media / journalism are a business of competition.
He argues that grass-root media doesn’t exist in Finland and that is of a big disadvantage for the ecosystem and for journalists working in next level. He also argues that the role of the journalists depends on on what level they operate
Carl-Gustav Lindén, Journalist, YLE, Finland
He has participated in Innovation Journalism program in Sweden, England, Pakistan, it was a great experience to see differences and it made him change his way of framing his work.
He underlines the interconnectedness of the world referring to global financial crisis.
The important is: What is the value journalists bring to society?
Such questions on Innovation journalism should be asked: is it a new journalism for the good of society? Is it for money? Is it new journalism? Whose interests are seen?
He thinks definitions are not clear. He says: there also is bad innovation. How do you report on that?
Finnish innovation: saving the nation, is not there. Innovation is global
At the end of the first round of talks the Chair opens up the discussion, below are the statements from the interactive discussion:
Innovations are adapted in different ways – e.g. USA vs. Finland, checks vs. bank transfer- and they are not always global and they don’t spread globally. And journalism is not global as such.
Global comes more surprisingly/ unpredictable – e.g. Nokia (company) and Nokia (city) may be mixed up on google searches.
Re: Difference between giving attention and promoting it?
What is in the content is promoting. Frame is the best marketing part. Promoting is giving. Giving is promoting. You could be critical you don’t have to promote. PR machine is promoting attention.
It depends on the country and it goes down to core values.- e.g. Consensus in Europe, failure in North, to be on news and it is different in USA.
Re: innovation and democratic systems comparing – how do you see the comparison?
You can vote more than once in innovation ecosystem. It is more flexible. Power is with those who are able to communicate better.
It goes back to the role f journalism and what topic we take to the agenda.
Re: Can journalism contribute to innovation processes by highlighting the process rather than just covering the existing innovation?
If policy is not done by regulators but by new actors, how do you put this in democracy? Journalism to facilitate public discussions on the issue.
Re: Is there a distinction between covering innovation and covering how it happens?
It’s risky/boring to cover innovation, could be a failure because you don’t know how it will conclude but on politics you are safe when you cover a political decision.
Re: Professionalism. Journalists are sometimes afraid of being PR – writing what they are said to write. Reflections?
Academic- journalist cooperation
There is an interdependence of all actors in society. Innovation journalism is able to integrate many perspectives.
Re: Are we expecting too much if we want T journalist? What would be the alternative solution?
You don’t need to know all but know all to cover your own special topic. More specialization rather than cover a bit of everything is needed.
Re: Research on changing nature of knowledge work and specialized knowledge. Knowledge workers also have division of labor, work in teams. T shape people are able to combine this expertise in a meaningful whole – does it apply to journalism?
Engineers have to learn how to communicate from journalists not only journalists learn from engineers.
American journalism is much more specialized. It is not narrow but the challenge is to put knowledge together with others.
Innovation is business driven. The solution approach: innovation for public good. It is not always for public good.
With globalization, there is an overload of information. Therefore there is customization of information that leads to polarization in society. Journalist should show a broader picture. Traditional role of journalism doesn’t work that well in globalization.
Re: if innovation key word in Finland, should we have innovation journalism?
Journalistic work is needed.
Journalism has missed an opportunity to open a discussion on which way /policy to follow.
An international evaluation of Finnish innovation will come out at the end of October and it will spark discussions.