Think Tanks in cyberspace: How organisations are adapting and wielding influence in the hybrid media system

本研究要解决的问题：在公民和公民团体可以绕过机构直接影响权力的数字时代，智库是否仍然具有相关性？这样的专业知识在当今支离破碎的媒体环境中有价值吗？智库如何重塑自己，以保持甚至增加其在民主制度中的影响力和权力？智库传统上是如何试图对政策过程施加影响的，这种情况是否发生了变化？智库采用了什么样的数字方法，他们是否在向政党和竞选活动、游说公司、新闻网站和压力集团等团体学习？智库的模式是否因此而发生了根本性的变化？智库如何采用和使用社交媒体来增加其权力和影响力？在这种新环境中取得成功或失败的TT的关键特征是什么？此外，还将通过对智库的运营和影响力的历史进行分析，来了解智库的权力和影响力是如何丧失的，以及如何被重新利用的。研究方法：通过对智库的重要人物和希望影响的国会议员等当权者进行访谈，来进行研究。采访将是获得定性数据的最佳方法，这些数据涉及智库如何寻求影响权势人物以及它们对权势人物的影响。还将观察所采用的数字方法及其与旧媒体方法的互动方式，特别是围绕试图影响政府政策的重要报告或小册子的发布。这可能会在与智囊团磋商之前和之后进行，使研究人员能够从所进行的观察中得出假设，从这项研究中提出问题，然后在稍后阶段重新应用所学到的东西。也有可能通过审查研究期间智囊团数字输出的数据，对研究进行混合方法。研究的定量元素将允许对智库所采用的方法进行数据驱动分析，从而使研究能够检查所研究的智库的相对成功和影响力。智库不是孤立运作的，而是适应其媒体体系和政治体系提供的激励和机会。从定义上讲，单一国家的案例研究无法处理这些差异，但跨国比较研究可以检验关于体制变量如何塑造智库行为及其影响的假设。跨国比较民族志比大规模定量研究或单一国家民族志使用较少，但对于比较和背景化主题，同时研究它们如何与当地实践相互作用是有用的（Jorgensen，2015）。这一点在美国尤其重要，在美国，许多数字实践是第一次出现，但并不总是以与美国起源相同的方式被大规模采用（Vaccari，2013）。英国将提供丰富的数据作为研究的起源国，并提供方便的访问，但加拿大也被提议作为两个国家之间的一个有趣的“中间点”进行研究-地理上与美国关系密切的北美，但受其近代历史的影响很大，作为一个英国自治领，使用威斯敏斯特议会制度。将加拿大纳入其中还将带来一个好处，即在数据收集期间研究一个将由进步政府领导的国家，而美国和英国将由保守政府领导。不同的智囊团能够影响政策和辩论的程度在很大程度上取决于谁掌权。

Questions to be addressed by this research:Are think tanks still relevant in the digital era, where citizens and citizen groups can bypass institutions and affect power directly? Is such expert knowledge valuable in today's fragmented media environment?How have think tanks remade themselves to hold on to or even increase their influence and power in democratic systems? How have think tanks traditionally attempted to exert influence on the policy process and has this changed?What digital methods have think tanks employed and are they learning from groups such as political parties and campaigns, lobbying firms, news websites and pressure groups? Is the model of what a think tank looks like fundamentally changing as a result of this?How have think tanks adopted and used social media to increase their power and influence?What are the key characteristics of the TTs that are having success or losing ground in this new environment?In addition, the work will explore the history of how think tanks operated and wielded influence historically to establish how they have lost power and influence, and how it is being reclaimed.Proposed Methodology:The study will use interviews with key figures in the think tanks studied and those in power they hope to influence such as Members of Parliament or members of Congress. Interviews will be the best method of obtaining qualitative data about how think tanks seek to influence the powerful and the effect they have on the powerful. Observation of the digital methods employed and how they interact with older media methods will also be carried out, particularly around the release of important reports or pamphlets that seek to influence government policy. This will probably take place both before and after consultation with the think tank, enabling the researcher to draw hypotheses from the observations carried out, formulate questions from this research, and then reapply what has been learned at a later stage. There is also the potential to carry out a mixed method element to the study by examining data from the digital output of the think tanks in the period studied. A quantitative element to the study will allow for a data driven analysis of the methods employed by the think tanks, allowing for the study to examine the comparative success and influence of the think tanks studied. Think tanks do not operate in isolation, but adapt to the incentives and opportunities provided by their media systems and political systems. While single-country case studies cannot, by definition, deal with these variations, cross-country comparative research can test hypotheses on the ways in which institutional variables shape the conduct of think tanks and its impact. Cross-national comparative ethnographies are less utilised than large-scale quantitative studies or single-country ethnographies, but are useful for comparing and contextualising topics while examining how they interact with local practices (Jorgensen, 2015). This is particularly important in the case of the United States, where much of digital practice is first seen, but does not always get adopted wholesale in the same way as it is used at its American origin (Vaccari, 2013). The United Kingdom will provide a wealth of data being the country of origin of the study and providing ease of access, but Canada is also proposed for study as an interesting 'halfway' point between the two nations - geographically North American with close relations to the United States, but heavily influenced by its recent history as a British dominion that uses the Westminster parliamentary system. The inclusion of Canada will also offer the benefit of studying a nation that will be under a progressive government while the US and the UK will be under conservative governments during the period of data collection. The extent to which different think tanks can influence policies and debates is to no small degree a function of who is in power.