While many journalists and researchers have adapted to the brave new world of social media, the changing media environment also signals a fundamental shift in the checks and balances that characterize the democratic order. In traditional print and electronic media, the watchdog role of both journalists and researchers has been upheld by their authority. They are considered reliable sources because of the reputation of the institutions they represent.
On social media, however, you are exposed, relying solely on the strength of your arguments and your audience. Traditionally, trust in scientists is significantly higher than in journalists. But beyond being in the same boat, the loss of authority also threatens reciprocity and, thus, mutual trust between the two. The spread of 'alternative truths' challenges what it means for a journalist to report in a fair and balanced way. Furthermore, the proliferation of social media allows researchers to challenge certain stories or even specific journalists.
This project examines the viability of the relationship between journalists and researchers. Journalists and researchers both act as 'watchdogs' who speak truth to power. Although journalists and scientists pursue different ideals of truth, studies generally show that in well-functioning liberal democracies, the relationship between journalists and scientists works well. In recent years, however, the watchdog role has come under increasing pressure from political and corporate stakeholders, further amplified by digital revolutions. These processes are eroding the foundations of both media and research institutions and opening the floodgates to 'alternative' interpretations.
