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

本研究需要解决的问题是：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碎片化的媒体环境中有价值吗？智库是如何重塑自己，以保持甚至增加他们在民主制度中的影响力和权力的？传统上，智库是如何试图对政策过程施加影响的，这种情况发生了变化吗？智库采用了哪些数字化方法？他们是否向政党、竞选团队、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发生了根本性的变化？智库是如何采用和利用社交媒体来增加自己的权力和影响力的？在这个新环境中取得成功或失去优势的电信公司的关键特征是什么？此外，该作品还将探索历史上智库如何运作和发挥影响力，以确定它们如何失去权力和影响力，以及如何重新获得权力和影响力。建议的研究方法：该研究将对研究的智库中的关键人物以及他们希望影响的权力人物（如国会议员或国会议员）进行采访。访谈将是获得关于智库如何寻求影响权贵及其对权贵的影响的定性数据的最佳方法。还将观察所采用的数字方法及其与旧媒体方法的相互作用，特别是在发布试图影响政府政策的重要报告或小册子时。这可能会在与智库协商之前和之后进行，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，然后在后期重新应用所学到的知识。通过检查研究期间智库的数字输出数据，也有可能对研究进行混合方法元素。本研究的定量要素将允许对智库采用的方法进行数据驱动的分析，从而使本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。虽然从定义上讲，单一国家的个案研究不能处理这些差异，但跨国比较研究可以检验关于体制变量如何影响智库行为及其影响的假设。跨国比较民族志的使用率低于大规模定量研究或单一国家民族志，但在比较和背景化主题时很有用，同时检查它们如何与当地实践相互作用（Jorgensen, 2015）。这在美国尤其重要，在美国，许多数字实践都是第一次被看到，但并不总是像它在美国起源时那样被大规模采用（Vaccari, 2013）。作为研究的原籍国，英国将提供丰富的数据，并提供方便的访问，但加拿大也被提议作为两国之间一个有趣的“中间”点进行研究——地理上位于北美，与美国关系密切，但受其近代史的影响很大，它是英国的自治领，使用威斯敏斯特议会制度。在数据收集期间，加拿大将是一个进步政府，而美国和英国将是保守政府的国家。不同的智库能在多大程度上影响政策和辩论，这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.