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

网络空间中的智库：组织如何适应混合媒体系统并发挥影响力

• 批准号: 2103961
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Loughborough University
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2018
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2018 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2103961
• 关键词: Think; Tanks; cyberspace; How; organisations

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.

这项研究要解决的问题是：在公民和公民团体可以绕过机构并直接影响权力的数字时代，智库是否仍然相关？在当今支离破碎的媒体环境中，这样的专业知识有价值吗？智库如何重塑自己，以保住甚至增加自己在民主制度中的影响力和权力？传统上，智库是如何试图对政策过程施加影响的？这种情况已经改变了吗？智库使用了哪些数字方法，它们正在向政党和竞选活动、游说公司、新闻网站和压力团体等团体学习吗？智库的模式是否因此发生了根本性的改变？智库是如何采用和使用社交媒体来增加其权力和影响力的？在这种新的环境中，智库成功或失利的关键特征是什么？此外，这项工作将探索智库历史上是如何运作和发挥影响力的，以确定它们是如何失去权力和影响力的，以及它们是如何重新获得权力和影响力的。建议的方法：这项研究将使用对所研究智库的关键人物和他们希望影响的掌权者的采访，如国会议员或国会议员。采访将是获得有关智库如何寻求影响有权势的人及其对有权势的人的影响的定性数据的最佳方法。还将对所采用的数字方法及其与旧媒体方法的互动情况进行观察，特别是在发布试图影响政府政策的重要报告或小册子方面。这可能会在与智库磋商之前和之后进行，使研究人员能够从进行的观察中得出假设，从这项研究中提出问题，然后在以后的阶段重新应用所学到的知识。还有可能通过检查所研究期间智囊团的数字产出的数据，在研究中采用混合方法要素。这项研究的量化要素将使智库能够对所采用的方法进行数据驱动的分析，从而使这项研究能够审查所研究的智库的相对成功和影响。智库不是孤立地运作，而是适应其媒体系统和政治系统提供的激励和机会。尽管从定义上讲，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制度变量如何影响智库行为及其影响的假设。与大规模定量研究或单一国家民族志相比，跨国比较民族志的使用较少，但在比较和确定主题的背景方面很有用，同时考察这些主题如何与当地实践互动(Jorgensen，2015)。在美国，这一点尤其重要，因为在美国，许多数字实践都是首次出现，但并不总是像在美国起源时那样大规模采用(Vaccari，2013)。英国将提供丰富的数据，因为它是研究的发源地，而且便于获取，但加拿大也被建议作为两个国家之间有趣的“中间”点进行研究--加拿大在地理上与美国关系密切，但受到其作为使用威斯敏斯特议会制的英国自治领的近期历史的严重影响。在数据收集期间，加拿大的加入还将有利于研究一个将由进步政府领导，而美国和英国将由保守派政府领导的国家。不同智库能够在多大程度上影响政策和辩论，在很大程度上取决于谁掌权。